Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Fire in the hallowed chambers: Will flame of scandal gut the Judiciary?

Prof Sir,

I beg to disagree with your view on this.Do you think the Justices who shall try this case at the higher courts would be free of pressure from the big boss who appointed them.Sir this is Nigeria and we know how it works. Isit the new person who replaced Salami that wiill give him justice or the New CJ who may be  under the pressure of the PDP machine that appointed him? This is case is beyound the courts now.We need a political solution not a legal one. Salami should be allowed to complete his tenure and retire. The president and the ex CJN over reached themselves, but they never knew there actions will attract so much public outcry.

Nkolika

 

From: Ifedioramma E. Nwana <ienwana@yahoo.com>
To: "usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com" <usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 2:56 PM
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Fire in the hallowed chambers: Will flame of scandal gut the Judiciary?

Thanks Kayode, 

 

Your comments on the Legal Problems with Salami's suit sums it all.  I read an interesting one from page 8 of Daily Sun of 30th August in which the Sun reported that Prof. D. A. Ijalaiye SAN had made some recommendations including that HE The President should rescind the decisions on Salami's suspension while allowing Katsina-Alu to leave office "naturally"! 

 

The President took a very wise and informed action to ask Salami to step aside so that the NBA would not have to point out that the Hon. President of the Court of Appeal was a judge in his own case when the matter would come to the Appeal Court and he as President would appoint the Justices to determine the appeal  OR should the President have waited for the appeal (which will surely arise) before asking him to step aside UNTIL THE CASE WAS DETERMINED?  It is only now that both Salami and Katsina-Alu are no more on seat that going to the courts as an option in this saga can be immagined with any meaning. 

 

I plead that before the practitioners in this noble profession of learned persons (Bar and Bench) com[pletely destroy our hope and expectations from the courts, we, ordinary persons, should be allowed to watch how this matter progresses in the courts, with the two principal contestants no longer in the position to influence the proceedings.  Then, and only then, may we get the kind of landmark judjement you have referred to.  NIGERIA MUST SURVIVE!!

 

Ifedioramma Eugene Nwana 

From: kayode ketefe <kayodeketefe@yahoo.com>
To: USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, 28 August 2011, 17:24
Subject: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Fire in the hallowed chambers: Will flame of scandal gut the Judiciary?

THE BIG READ   Fire in the hallowed chambers: Will flame of scandal gut the Judiciary?   KAYODE KETEFE   The Judiciary of any nation is the bastion of hope, the succour for the downtrodden and the vanguard of social justice. Therefore whenever genuine doubt arises about the integrity of the Judiciary, it would have far-reaching consequences that may threaten the social order and harmonious co-existence. The Nigerian Judiciary has come a long way, having built over the years a deserved reputation of a hallowed, uncorrupted institution. It is Nigerian Judiciary that declared the first military coup in Nigeria illegal. That was in the case of Lakanmi V. Attorney - General, Western Region (1970) 6 N. S. C. C. 143) where, the Supreme Court of Nigeria held that the 1966 coup de'tat was not a revolution but an illegal hijack of power. This decision so infuriated the then Federal Military Government, headed by General Yakubu Gowon, that it immediately promulgated a decree which ousted the jurisdiction of the court to inquire into legality of military decrees; it is the same Judiciary that produced the likes of a tigress on the bench, Justice Dolapo Akinsanya, who courageously declared the Interim National Government, headed by Chief Ernest Shonekan, illegal. Even during the present republic, laudable, courageous judgments have emanated from the temple of justice; these included the judgment of the Supreme Court between Lagos State and the Federal Government on the former local government funds, the quashing of impeachment of Senator Rashidi Ladoja as the governor of Oyo State, and the installation of Governor Peter Obi of Anambra in office. However, the Judiciary of recent, has come under some unsavoury criticisms. Just before the last general polls, the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, Prof. Attahiru Jega, wrote a petition to the CJN and copied President Goodluck Joanthan. The purport of the letter is that that numerous "frivolous" ex parte orders were being slammed on INEC by the courts, which almost affected the smooth conduct of the last April general polls. Before that there were a number of allegations that some senior lawyers/ judges were sent as emissaries by the politicians to compromise their fellow judicial officers in recent etc. Then the bombshell was dropped! An  ususual face-off began between the heads of the topmost courts in Nigeria, the President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Ayo Isa Salami and the Chief Justice of Nigeria. Justice Iyorgher Katsina-Alu.  This self-destructive Katsina-Alu/Salami saga with its embarrassing accusations and counter-accusations jolted the whole nation as it was most unprecedented. All the above have now collectively combined to blot the white linen of the justice institution in the minds of ordinary Nigerians. This kind of open fight at that level is exceedingly in the Judiciary because of the conservative and high level of "cult-like secrecy" with which many of its affairs are often conducted.   Katsina-Alu/Salami saga: How it all began   The National Mirror newspaper broke the news that Justice Salami would be offered elevation from the top post at the Appeal Court to the Supreme Court by Chief Justice of Nigeria, Katsina-Alu, and that Salami would reject it on the ground that it was not offered in good faith.   True to the reports, Katsina-Alu soon made the open offer which Salami rejected. Even then, nobody could have thought the then unfolding story would culminate into saga that would rock the Judiciary into its foundations. Salami construed the elevation as a cunning measure to consign him into irrelevance. The CJN insisted that he was motivated by the benign intention to have the apex court fortified by a competent person like Salami. Salami was not impressed by this eulogy that his inclusion would constitute an asset at the Supreme Court, he insisted that the CJN was actuated by malice, stressing that he was scheming to get him out of the way. At the height of this "elevation" furore, Salami went to a Federal High Court into Abuja to contest the move to foist unwanted elevation on him.  It was in the affidavit he filed at that court that he made the earth-shaking revelation that the CJN had lobbied him to pervert the course of justice in  the Sokoto State governorship election appeal. He said the CJN had entreated him to give judgment in favour of the incumbent governor of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP ) Aspersions and shocking accusations flew in every direction. If it is true that the CJN had attempted to interfere with the proceedings of the Sokoto State election tribunal, that would have constituted an affront to the independence of the judiciary, because any attempt by a judge to manipulate a fellow judge would be a blatant negation of the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The Rule 8 of the said Code states that a Judicial Officer "should abstain from comment about a pending or impending proceeding in any court in this country, and should require similar abstention on the part of court personnel under his direction and control."   Analysis of an unwanted elevation   Why on earth would somebody resist promotion from a lower court to a higher one? This question may agitate the minds of those who are not steeped in the way our judicial system operates. The truth is that the President of the Court of Appeal is far more powerful in the judicial parlance than a 'mere" member of the Supreme Court. As the President of the Court of Appeal, Salami wields the power of constituting the various panels that would adjudicate, among other matters, the Governorship and Legislative Houses Election Petitions, and given the fact that this is a period of democracy, it could be seen why such position is pivotal.  The mere fact that the latest amendment to the 1999 Constitution has removed the barrier  which hitherto made Court of Appeal the court of last resort in the governorship and legislative houses election petitions does not significantly detract from this fact. On the other hand, if Salami had allowed his elevation, he would simply go and queue up behind the last judge at the Supreme Court, and given the fact that he has only two years to retire, he could entertain no further hope of career progression. He would simply be pragmatically powerless! In addition if he had gone to the Supreme Court, he would be under the great influence of the CJN, who has the power to fix him into any panel at his discretion. So one could easily understand why it is reasonable for Salami to choose to remain as the President of Court of Appeal for the putative last two years of his career life.   Salami's suit and the legal problem   When Salami filed his cases in court, the first against his purported elevation and the second against the NJC and others to prevent the NJC from acting on the recommendations of the panels set up to investigate the feud between him and the CJN, some legal experts believe that the judicial option ought not to have been invoked. The matter was instituted at the Federal High Court from which appeal lies to other courts. One of these lawyers, Mr. John Osighala said "The appeal from the Federal High Court lies to the Court of Appeal which is headed by Salami! Now further appeal from the Court of Appeal lies to the Supreme Court which is headed by the CJN! You can see why the legal option has its own imperfections.   Resolving the crisis through a deluge of panels   When the crisis reached the climax, the National Judicial Council set up a Panel headed by the former Court of Appeal President, Justice Umaru Abdullahi.  The panel sat, heard all the parties and eventually submitted its report. In essence the panel held that Salami's allegation against the CJN was "baseless". However, Salami himself was given a clean bill of health, he and the other justices of the Court of Appeal having been cleared by the panel on the allegations that the members of the governorship appeal panels in Osun and Ekiti states were financially induced to give judgment in favour of the Action Congress of Nigeria. The panel held that no evidence of financial inducement was established.  Almost at the same time of setting up Justice Abdullahi panel, the Nigerian Bar Association set up a 13-member panel on February 21, 2011. The  panel was headed by Chief Thompson Okpoko to investigate the feud between the CJN and Salami and two lawyers Alfred Agu and Mahmood Yahaya. Apart from Okpoko, other members include Chief Idowu Sofola, Chief Bamidele Aiku, Dr. S. S. Ameh, Prof. G. A. Olawoyin, E.J.J. Toro, Chief Asam Asam, Mr. Marcus Saleh and Mr. Oba Ulasi, Mrs. Stella Ugboma, Alhaji M.U. Ibrahim and Mr. Ebenzer Obeya In its report submitted to the NBA on July 8, the panel stated "When Justice Salami who came into office and set up the panel to hear the appeal refused to interfere with the proceedings of the Sokoto Election Appeal Panel, Messrs Agu and Mahmood took the matter to the CJN who readily acceded to their request and, without considering what the petitioners were alleging as misconduct, promptly directed that further proceedings on the appeal be put on hold. "By these petitions, both counsel played material part in the action taken by the CJN which brought about the crisis in the judiciary which resulted in the CJN/Salami standoff. "In the final analysis, this committee affirms the petitions of Agu and Mahmood were all tailored to achieve one purpose. That purpose was to delay the hearing and determination of the election appeal filed by Alhaji Muhammadu Dingyadi and his party, the Democratic People's Party (DPP)." In conclusion the panel cleared the two protagonists of misconducts.   NJC's second Panel: Justice Auta Committee   After receiving the Justice Abdullahi panel's report, the NJC set up another five-man panel headed by the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta, to consider and study the report of Justice Abdullahi panel and make recommendations on appropriate punishment to be meted out to whoever is culpable among the feuding parties. The said Auta Committee stated that it found Salami guilty of lying on oath in his affidavit filed at the Federal High Court Abuja where he alleged that the CJN attempted to manipulate him to change the course of Justice in the Sokoto State governorship election appeal. Accordingly, the committee recommended that Salami should tender a written apology to the CJN within seven days. Salami was adamant; he refused to tender the apology and instead went to the same Federal High Court, Abuja, praying for orders restraining the NJC, among others from implementing the recommendations of its panels. In the suit filed on his behalf by his lawyers Chief Akin Olujinmi SAN, Rickey Tarfa SAN  and Chief Adeniyi Akintola SAN, the embattled appellate court boss is asking the  court to set aside the proceeding and findings of the investigation panels of both Justice Abdullahi and Auta. He wants the court to hold that the setting up of the NJC Investigation Committee and its composition are gross violation of the principles of natural justice and a breach of his fundamental rights under Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution. On Monday, August 15, the NJC refused to accept the service of the Salami court process. Amidst growing criticisms that greeted the refusal, NJC later rationalised that it refused to accept the service because the process was unsigned. Two days later, precisely on August 18, NJC released a bombshell.   The NJC's unpopular masterstroke   On Thursday August 18, 2011, the NJC announced the suspension of Salami over the refusal of the latter to apologise to the CJN after "lying on oath" against the said CJN. The council in a statement signed by its Director of Administration, Mr. E.I. Odukwu, further directed Salami to handover to the next most senior justice of the Appellate Court. The statement read in part,"Pursuant to the powers conferred on the National Judicial Council in the Constitution of the Nigeria, 1999 as amended, Hon. Justice Isa Ayo Salami, OFR, President of the Court of Appeal has been suspended from office with effect from today 18th August, 2011. "The decision was reached at the 7th Emergency Meeting of the Council held on 18th August, 2011. "The decision was reached as the National Judicial Council further directs that Hon. Justice Salami should hand over the affairs of the Court of Appeal to the next most senior justice of the court. Meanwhile a recommendation has been forwarded to the President, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan to retire him from service." The council however made no reference to the suit filed by Salami at the Federal High Court in Abuja in which he is challenging the report of the Umaru Abddullahi panel.  Giving reasons for its decision NJC, maintained that Salami had breached Rule 1(1) of the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers which provides among other things, that "A Judicial Officer should respect and comply with the laws of the land and should conduct himself at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary."   Criticisms trail NJC's decision   A floodgate of criticisms was flung open as soon as the NJC's decision was announced. The Nigerian Bar Association, through its President, Mr Joseph Bodunrin Daudu, said "The matter was clearly sub judice when the NJC proceeded with its action on the 18th of August 2011. "The judicial reversal of the NJC's unfortunate and worrisome actions is matter to be left for the law courts to deal with as they fit. "It is a matter of great concern and shame that a judicial organisation of the calibre of the NJC can ride roughshod over the processes of a court of law. "The implication for Nigerian judicial process is catastrophic. If not remedied, we are witnessing the slide into anarchy and lawlessness which history will record as having been fired up by the Judiciary.  As part of the legal profession we shall not sit idly and watch our profession ridiculed and brought into disrepute in the public domain" A Lagos-based human rights activist, Mr Femi Falana, immediately urged the President not to accept the recommendation. The fiery Falana said "By virtue of section 292(1) of the constitution, the PCA could only be removed from office by the president acting on an address supported by two-thirds of the Senate.  "By suspending Justice Salami from office, the National Judicial Council acted ultra vires. "Under Section 238 of the constitution, if the office of the President of the Court of Appeal becomes vacant, the President of Nigeria 'shall appoint the most senior Justice of the Court of Appeal to perform those functions' pending the appointment of the President of the Court. By directing the most senior Justice of the Court of Appeal to take over the functions of the office of the President of the Court of Appeal, the National Judicial Council has usurped the powers of the President of Nigeria. An Ibadan-based Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr. Lateef Fagbemi, said the parties ought to have awaited the outcome of the proceedings before the court before the NJC took its decision. He said "I think it is a sad development. It is an elementary principle of law that when a matter is pending in court all the parties involved ought to exercise restraint from acting on the subject matter. "It is the principle of lis pendes, it is definitely not a good example for any of the parties to take action on the subject matter since that will lead to anarchy. I am member of the NBA, I support the position of the NBA on the matter" Also a Lagos-based non-governmental organisation, Access to Justice, wrote a letter dated August 19, to the CJN urging him to convene a meeting of the NJC to reverse its position on Salami. The letter, signed by the organisation's Executive Director, read in part "the NJC's departure from years of established precedent, practice and principle as it has done in this case has escalated fears that the NJC is pursuing a parochial agenda, triggering palpable public apprehension that this particular decision by the NJC is politically-motivated and that the NJC has, from the beginning lacked fairness, independence and objectively in its investigation of allegations against both the CJN and the PCA. "Besides this, the NJC's actions further diminish the Nigerian Judiciary as well as, in an overall context, the credibility of the entire system of administration of justice in Nigeria We are, by this petition, urging Your Lordship to convene an emergency meeting of the NJC urgently to review the decision of the Council to suspend Hon. Justice Ayo Salami (OFR) as President of the Court of Appeal and forestall plunging the judiciary further into deeper crisis. Thank you for your consideration" Also speaking in similar vein, the Chairman of Ikeja Branch of NBA, Mr. Adebamigbe Omole, said "The second panel, that is the Auta panel was set up deliberately to do a dirty job, this is very said, it is shameful that this kind of thing should be happening to our Judiciary. Politicians have infiltrated the Judiciary"   The NBA unusual stance   Last Sunday, the National Executive Committee of the NBA during its pre-conference meeting reached a decision withdrawing its membership from the NJC over its decision in Salami/CJN saga. In accordance with the NEC's decision, the NBA's statutory five members of the NJC have since been withdrawn from the body which is headed by the Chief Justice of Nigeria.  These are  Mr. Olisa Agbakoba SAN, the NBA President, Mr. Joseph Daudu SAN, Mr. OCJ Okocha, Mr.  Emmanuel Toro SAN and Mr.  Rotimi Akeredolu. The NBA was scandalised by the NJC's action and insisted that it was wrong for the council to have suspended Salami when the matter was sub judice (that is, pending in court)     A controversial presidential assent and condemnation galore  Barely two hours after the NBA took the above-decision last Sunday; there was a prompt response fro the presidency. A statement was released by presidential spokesperson, Dr. Reuben Abati. The statement stated that President Jonathan had received a letter from the NJC dated 18th August, 2011 which recommended compulsory retirement of Salami over alleged misconduct. The statement read in part, "President Jonathan, in exercise of the powers conferred on him by Section 238 (4) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended, has approved the acting appointment of Hon. Justice Dalhatu Adamu to perform the functions of the office of the President of the Court of Appeal pending when all issues relating to the office of the President of the Court of Appeal are resolved." The president seems to have upheld  the NJC's position  that Salami was guilty of  "misconduct in breach of "the provisions of Section 292 (1) (a) (i) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended, and Rule 1 (1) of the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria". If the NJC decision had attracted a floodgate of criticisms, what followed after the president retirement of Salami could be described as a deluge. The NBA promptly reacted that it would not be cowed into abandoning its struggle to ensure that due process and rule of law is enthroned in the polity. Speaking last Monday during the just concluded NBA Annual General Conference in Port Harcourt, Daudu said "Barely two hours after  our National Executive Council made the decision that the NBA should withdraw from the National Judicial Council, President Goodluck Jonathan announced the replacement of Salami with Justice Dalhatu Adamu." "While it may be insignificant whether this is a coincidence or not, what cannot be taken away is the fact that President Goodluck Jonathan has lost another opportunity to take the side of the rule of law and due process." A vibrant Lagos lawyer, Mr. Bamidele Aturu, said "One is lost for words to describe the decision of the President to ratify the recommendation of some members of the National Judicial Council that the President of the Court of Appeal be retired or suspended. The decision is clearly not in the best interest of the country and will certainly strengthen the enemies of the rule of law. It is unclear to me why the President chose to side with the judicial anarchists and terrorists who made the recommendation in the first place. What is clear is that many people who had assumed that the President is a gentleman who will not do anything to confer undue advantage on himself and his political party would be forgiven if they think that he was part of the game-plan right from the beginning and that it is all about getting Salami out of the Presidential election Tribunal hearing the CPC case against the President's election."  Another lawyer and human rights activist, Mr. John Osighala, said "The development has foisted on us an embarrassing situation. "The court of law should have been allowed to adjudicate the matter. Nobody has the right to take the law into its hand. We should respect the integrity of the Judiciary. "Anyway, the matter is still in the court and it is left for that court to decide whether or not NJC, by its action, is guilty of contempt of court"   What is the way forward?   Whatever the ultimate outcome of this tragic drama in which the top echelon of the Judiciary in Nigeria are the dramatis personae, it is certain that the confidence of the people has in the third organ of government is now at its lowest ebb ever, the Judiciary would have a lot to do to rebuild its once sacred image which has been battered in the opinions of Nigerians. NBA is already calling for restructure of the Judiciary with a view to lay the foundation for this change. Whether or not it will work remain to be seen.

-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin. For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue- unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogueFor previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.htmlTo post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.comTo unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue- unsubscribe@googlegroups.com