[size=14pt]Katsina-Alu, Salami – As It Was In The Beginning…[/size]
On August 24, 2011 · In Editorial , 

A judicial officer shall not be removed from his office or appointment before his age of retirement except in the following circumstances – 1 (a) in the case of – (i) Chief Justice of Nigeria, President of the Court of Appeal, by the President acting on an address supported by two-thirds majority of the Senate. – Section 292 of the 1999 Constitution

JUSTICES Aloysius Katsina-Alu and Isa Ayo Salami are ending their careers as top justices the same way as they started – controversially.

When out-going Chief Justice of Nigeria Idris Legbo Kutigi swore them in on 30 December 2009, there were concerns that the Constitution might have been violated. We are probably reaping the consequences of that ceremony that cast a blur on their tenure in the beginning.

[size=14pt]Did we have two Chief Justices of Nigeria on 30 December since Kutigi still had a day left in his tenure and did not resign?  Was Kutigi qualified to swear in Katsina-Alu as the Chief Justice of Nigeria and Salami as the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeal when there was a healthy Vice President? These meanderings were at the instance of those propping up the powers of an ailing President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua and refusing then Vice President Goodluck Jonathan to stand in for the President.[/size]

Debates about the legality of the event continued. We had warned then that the situation was unfortunate. Anyone who wanted to contest the issues in court could end up with either Justices Katsina-Alu or Salami presiding over the case or appointing the judges, if the matter got to appeal.

We are back to the same situation today. We have several times told the two dueling judicial officers to resign, to save some respect for the judiciary, which they have so ably served. This option could have created better room, if they wanted to pursue their grievances in court. They refused. Katsina-Alu is due for retirement on 28 August, but that would not be the end of the matter as the National Judicial Council, NJC, is a party to the case that Salami filed over his relationship with Katsina-Alu and the NJC, which last week suspended Salami indefinitely.

President Jonathan added to the saga by asking Salami to step aside from office, claiming to act on the provisions of Section 292 (1) of the Constitution which state, aside from “A judicial officer shall not be removed from his office or appointment before his age of retirement except in – (a) in the case of – (i) Chief Justice of Nigeria, President of the Court of Appeal, by the President acting on an address supported by two-thirds majority of the Senate.”

Which aspect of Section 292 did the President use to ask Salami to step aside from office? When did the President address the Senate? When were the votes cast? This constitutional provision is to protect the independence of the judiciary, which the President has abridged through his intervention, which is not only belated but seemingly biased.

In some of the most disturbing judicial incidents, before Salami’s removal, he could not serve court papers on the NJC. When ordinary litigants run into difficulties in serving court papers, judges would normally upbraid the other partner for obstructing justice.

Precedents are important. When judicial officers treat judicial processes with such scant interest, what message are they passing to people? What reason would the NJC adduce for refusing to be served? Equally disturbing is the President’s intervention, appropriating powers the Constitution did not award him.

The NJC is hounding Salami for allegedly lying against Katsina-Alu. It wanted Salami to apologise to Katsina-Alu. Why should the NJC reduce a possible criminal offence to a personal matter? If Salami lied against Katsina-Alu – considering that the allegations were made under oath, in papers filed in court – is the punishment for perjury an apology to Katsina-Alu? Why did the NJC not charge Salami with perjury, to deter those who swear false affidavits?

Salacious details of how the judiciary dispenses justice may entertain the public, yet this case denudes the judiciary, coming from its top members. It also shows the NJC, in its current composition, is in strictures to discipline judges. It is worsened by the President’s interference.

We support independence of the judiciary but that independence comes with clear understanding of responsibility of the judiciary, usually to the public, but more demandingly to itself. Both strands of responsibility are lacking in this case and that is the real shame. The answer does not lie in the President compounding the issues by abusing Section 292 as he has clearly done. He cannot make appointment to a position that is not vacant.

http://www.vanguardngr.com/2011/08/katsina-alu-salami-%E2%80%93-as-it-was-in-the-beginning%E2%80%A6/

Our judiciary needs to be cleansed off all remnants of the cabal. They cannot continue to derail the justice system in the country.

A curious question; have we really had a Chief Justice and a President of the Appeal Court, or are they both illegal usurpers sworn in by the same criminals that flew in Yar Adua in the dead of night? If that is the case, they must both be dismissed.