An array of poisonous arrows seems to be coming the way of Nigeria’s Chief Justice, Justice Walter Onnoghen. His travails began last week end and has dominated the mind of Nigerians since then.
The country appear divided on his fate, with some people coming out to serve as human shield and if possible chest the arrows in his defense. The Federal Government on Thursday ordered that the CJ’s accounts be frozen, a clear indication that the authorities are not going to hands off the case so easily.
Onnoghen was accused of breaching the Code of Conduct for public officers having failed to declare his assets fully. The Code of Conduct Bureau acting on a petition written by Mr Dennis Aghanya who is a top official of Anti-Corruption And Research Based Data Initiative, (ARDI), has beamed the searchlight on suspicious transactions of the CJ. The ARDI petition dated January 7 was received on January 9.
Aghanya claimed Onnoghen made five cash deposits of $10,000 on March 8, 20111 into Standard Chartered Bank Account 1062650 and $5000 each and another four deposits on June 7, 2011. He was said to have made similar cash deposits of $10,000 on June 27 in the same year and four deposits of $10,000 each the following day.
The petitioner claimed that Onnonoghen breached the Code of Conduct Bureau and the Tribunal Act against the constitutional requirement of a public servant. He also claimed that the CJ’s cash deposits appear suspicious raising serious prospects of financial crime. In all, what has been traced to the CJ’s account is in the range of $3million dollars, representing almost the monthly allocation of some states of the Federation.
There were also allegations of failure to declare his assets after he was sworn in as the Justice of the Supreme Court between 8th June 2005 to 14t December 2016. Section 158 (1) of the 1999 Constitution says the National Judicial Council, (NJC) has the jurisdiction to deal with matters of misconduct and discipline of judicial officers. But there have been counter arguments that the CJ may have committed financial crimes and that the NJC should not act as another legal sovereignty, by creating the impression that a special court for the privileged exists far above the Nigerian constitution whose ground norm is the equality of every citizen before the law.
The CJ was scheduled to be arraigned in Court last Monday, but a team of lawyers led by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Chief Wole Olanipekun stood in his defense.
On Monday, when he was scheduled to appear before the Code of Conduct Tribunal, (CCT), 87 lawyers rose in his defense at the Tribunal. Meanwhile, the National Industrial Court in Abuja ordered that Onnoghen must not be forced out of office. It said the order was necessary to aver constitutional crisis. Lagos lawyer, Mr Femi Falana on Thursday queried the right of the NIC to give such an order and in what capacity.
The CCT three-man judges on Monday adjourned proceedings till January 22. Since the case began, various interests have turned the debate into a buffet trying to hawk on the issue including the main opposition. Speaking on the travails of the CJ, the Peoples Democratic Party, (PDP) Presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar faulted the charges. “Since judicial officers are disciplined by the National Judicial Council, (NJC), the CCB was wrong to have referred the matter to the CCT even if the allegations have been found to have any substance. The proper procedure would have been for the petition to be referred to the JSC of which Onnoghen is the Chairman, but he would have to excuse himself from the process. If found guilty, he could be asked to vacate his office as CJ in addition to other punishments.” Some analysts fear that referring the case to the NJC may be counter-productive since it would empower the accused, that is the CJ to preside over his own case, negating a fundamental principle of justice.
Why the opposition liken the CJ situation to witch hunting, in his response, the Special Adviser to the President on Political Matters, Senator Babafemi Ojudu said the Presidency did not know anything about the petition. He said “Buhari never at any time demanded CJ’s resignation. I challenge anyone who says so to cite the pronouncement, the press statement or quote any public official who made such announcement.” He said whatever is the merit of the case ‘being put against the CJ, it is not advisable at this time. So it is not about the rightness of the planned action.”
The controversy took a new twist early this week when some state governors from the CJ’s ancestral homestead ordered that he should ignore the summon. The governors of Bayelsa State, Seriake Dickson; Ben Ayade of Cross Rivers; Udom Emmanuel of Akwa Ibom and Nyeson Wike of Rivers State described the trial as motivated by ethnicity and prejudice. The meeting was held in Abuja but without the presence of the governors of Delta and Edo States. They stated “We call on the CJN to ignore this so called court summons from the CCT and the provocative call for his resignation in some quarters. While we are not opposed to a genuine fight against corruption, such an action must always be anchored on the rule of law.”
In what some observers see as a ridiculous development, armed groups in the Niger Delta under the auspices of Coalition of Niger Delta Agitators promised to attack oil wells in the oil rich Niger Delta if the harassment continues. In most cases, the militants’ statements are usually signed with pseudonyms. In a country where truth is often coloured by ethnicity and religious bigotry, many were not surprised about the brimstone of criticisms coming from a section of the South-South and South East where Onnonoghen comes from.
Nelson Ekujimi, a right activist said the position of the militants indicated that their struggle is not motivated by the genuine interests of their people but rather designed to support individuals who are probably ready to pay for such rent-seeking loyalty. Some analysts think the prompt response of the pro-CJN governors may suggest a working relationship between the CJ and possibly a network of politicians hands-in-gloves with the CJ. From indications, the support for the CJ appears to be in different categories: politicians feasting on the issue for maximum electoral advantage; corrupt elements who think the trial of the CJ would legitimize the prospect of bringing anyone, no matter how highly placed to book; lawyers who may have benefitted from favours dispensed by the highest echelon of the judiciary against honest judicial processes.
A lawyer who does not wish to be named asked rhetorically, “the truth is that those SANs defending the CJ, where were they when Monrufu, the meat seller in Ibadan was detained for crimes he did not commit? Where were the SANs when Peter, the innocent boy was killed by SARs?
He said “I suspect there is a notorious ring of crooks in the judiciary, I understand some judges have all expenses paid trip to London and US at the beckon of some legal Lords. What the SANs are merely acting is seeking to benefit either actual or potential good will of the CJ.
He said the man has committed a crime, the highest justice officer in the land and that he has no immunity.
Some argue that because the NJC rules says Judges can only be sanctioned by the NJC, tge in going Issue presents a unique case on its own in the sense that the CJ who also leads the NJC cannot be a judge in his own case neither should he be allowed to determine what should be the NJC’s response in a case that directly affects him.”
A journalist who does not want his name in print told Newdawn that there are subsisting allegations of criminal conducts against the CJ, adding that the most honorable step is for him to step aside and face the law. “He may eventually win, but we should bear in mind that he has already admitted to a plea of guilt when he said he ‘forgot’ which is not a tenable excuse in law.”
