1. Hello all. I feel that I need to put in my two bits in the Onoghen/CCB debate. First let me tell you where I stand. I am for strong institutions & the rule of law. I believe that the law should be no respecter of persons. With that foundation, please follow me on this journey.
2. Facts only:
a) Has the CJN been removed, answer is NO?
b) Can the President remove the CJN, the answer is Yes/No
c) Can the CJN be arraigned before the CCB? The answer to me is inconclusive, but I will be rooting for YESS and I will explain as we go on further.
3. Can the President Remove the CJN?
Yes he can remove the CJN but on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council (NJC) and the NJC itself is advised by the Federal Judicial Service Commission.
4. Please see the following images which are excerpts from the Constitution
These are from the Third Schedule to the Constitution Part 1 on State Bodies E and I sections (Below)
5. From the provisions it is clear that the President must receive recommendations from the NJC before he can appoint or remove Onnoghen & if fact other S.Ct Justices /Justice of Federal Courts. This is in consonance with the principles of Separation of Powers with checks & balances.
6. You will observe from the provisions of the Const. that the CJN is a member of the two bodies that have a say in his removal. This very fact again offends another very key maxim of equity which is “nemo judex in causa sua” meaning that “you cannot be a judge in your own conundrum.
7. What can propel the FJSC and the NJC to start proceedings against the Chairman of their respective boards? The Attorney General must send in a petition to the NJC and ask them to investigate their own chairman and recommend him for removal. We can all see the legal conundrum
8. Who will nominate the judge that is next in line to the CJN to start the process of investigating the CJN & what is there to investigate? The CJN has admitted all charges brought against him by the CCB. From this point of view, the NJC need no further evidence? CJN is wrong.
9. So what should happen? How does the FGN go forward on this. Judging by all the conundrum of the NJC, should the FGN do nothing when it is obvious that the NJC will likely do nothing? How does the FGN which has the right of initiating the prosecutorial process go on?
10.The FGN through the CCB initiates a trial before the CCT? Was the CCB right or wrong? We again go to the Constitution. What are the functions & duties of the CCB? The Constitution tries to entrench transparency & accountability in public servants by requiring asset declaration distinguished
11. The CJN is a public officer who is caught smack at the centre of this misbehaviour. It is important to note that the CJN HAS NO IMMUNITY. So nothing stops CCB from arraigning him before CCT on false declaration of assets. I believe the case of Nganjiwa Vs FRN can be distinguished
12. Before I distinguish the two situations let us look at what awaits the CJN at the CCT. Again we look at the Constitution.(Below)
13. If the CJN is found guilty (& in this case he has admitted guilt anyway) the CCT can remove him from office, ban him from future office for 10 years, confiscate assets & other punishment which the NASS has prescribed. Has NASS or will NASS ever prescribe additional punishment? Act.
14. Now to distinguish Nganjiwa Vs FRN to this CJN scenario, mind you my colleagues will come after me for this one so let me state that this is what I shall be arguing if I were the FGN’s lawyer. Nganjiwa J, was arrested and arraigned on charges of corruption under EFCC Act.
15. The charges are strictly criminal. In CJN’s case he is arraigned under a specific law -Code of Conduct which is what it says a rule for public servants that guides their behaviour. It is not stricto sensu a crime but a failure to act judiciously & for which the punishments…
16….are also not stricto sensu jail term. Is there a need of recourse to the NJC in a case where another govt constitutional constituted body has powers to decide on a specific infraction? I would submit no. The FGN should have this issue decided as a preliminary issue because…
17. …there seems to be a judicial protectionism which is sneaking in Immunity that the constitution has not granted to judicial officers. The CJN has been arraigned, let us test the constitution and the powers it gives and where there is need for a reform in law, let us do so.
18. The administration of justice in Nigeria is being rubbished if the CJN continues in office knowing that he has lost credibility to preside. We as Nigerians do not know the damage we do to our own institutions when we carry on with the prism of ethnicity & politicking
19. Every single decision of the S.Ct on corruption that had Onnoghen as a member of the panel is under a hue, from now onwards he is impotent. It is similar to @HMKemiAdeosun’s case. He needs to resign since he knows he cannot be sacked. That is the right thing to do.
20. As for me, I would continue to urge the FGN to bring all these issues to the public, not minding the times or seasons. We need to hold public officers accountable & they need to hold themselves accountable. The CJN, having admitted wrong doing needs to resign honourably.
By Barrister Iyabo Awokoya
