My People:
I receive support from someone better trained in Law than myself. In fact, I ain't trained at all, but that has never stopped me from pretending to be !
Bolaji Aluko
Having a belly laugh
Quote
On Onnoghen's issue Aare M. A. PhD Political Science, PhD Law, LLB, MHR writes
I am an apostle of legislative independence and autonomy in all ramifications. I studied it, taught it, fought for it and worked hard to make it real. I'm still doing these and will continue to do so. You all know where I stood and remain on this matter of separation of powers. While I do not subscribe to reckless executive powers, I don't equally give in to indolence, connivance or docility on the part of other arms of government in a period of great constitutional crisis like this.
Let us examine the scenario: Yes, the legislature (Senate) must approve a removal by a two-thirds majority votes, but where the Senate failed, refused or neglected to activate the process despite admission of error by the CJN, what happens? There, indeed, lies a lacuna, a serious one for that matter. What I expected my learned brothers, including the SANs and the NBA leadership, to have done was to advise the CJN to step aside in order not to offend the key principle of fair hearing (Nemo dat judex in causa sua - don't be a judge in your own cause).
CJN Onnoghen was, perhaps, conscious of that when he admitted errors in his assets declaration form but was prompted to hang on by peer and ethnic group pressures. He also failed to heed the warnings to step aside as a face saving strategy. His inaction and the actions of his backers were suggestive of wanting to drag the entire judiciary into the mud with him. In a situation where the legislature could not act and my learned senior brothers were unwilling to safe the judicial institution from the current travails, the doctrine of necessity could be invoked to prevent a constitutional cul de sac, by temporarily easing out the CJN to allow for proper investigation that may or may not indict him. The President as the "appointor" of the CJN under Section 231(1) has the power to appoint an acting CJN under Section 231(4) for a limited period not exceeding three months as provided under Section 231(5). This same principle governs the appointment and removal of the PCA (President of the Court of Appeal) appointed under Section 238(1) as applied in the earlier case of Isa Ayo Salami under the Jonathan administration.
The argument that the President ought to have waited for a recommendation from the NJC cannot be sustained in the instant case. By Schedule 3E, par 13(a)&(b), the FJSC can recommend removal of CJN to NJC, and the latter can by Schedule 3I, par 21(a)&(b) recommend the removal of the CJN. Unfortunately, the FJSC and the NJC are each headed by CJN, the accused person. This scenario wasn't entirely unforseen; I painted it vividly and warned against an NJC that was virtually turning into a monster as far back as 2014 in my POLITICS AND LAW: ANATOMY OF THE SIAMESE TWINS (Unilorin Inaugural Lecture). The issue of whether the Senate could activate the removal process itself is neither here nor there. What is certain is that the Senate as presently constituted could and, indeed, did not act!
In the circumstances, there was a constitutional vacuum, which could not be allowed to linger ad infinitum. The doctrine of necessity requires that someone must step in to do the needful. The onus fell on the President, the primus inter pares among the principalities of government, to break the logjam, as he did when he seized the opportunity of a CCT order to suspend (not remove) the CJN to prevent an infringement of the constitutional doctrine of Nemo Dat Judex in Causa Sua (you cannot be a judge in your own cause)! What he did is permitted by logic and our constitutional law.
By Prof. Rt. Hon. Aare Mojeed
On Wednesday, January 30, 2019, Mobolaji Aluko <alukome@gmail.com> wrote:
Salimonu Kadiri:In Nigeria's checks-and-balances presidential system:(1) The President can be impeached by the National Assembly, and then removed by adequate vote margin. Unless the President physically shuts down the Nass building, he cannot prevent the legislators from initiating such an impeachment move. His own cabinet can also initiate his removal, under certain unusual disability circumstances. The "victimized" President can appeal to the Judiciary to claim abuse of process, but he is unlikely to prevail.(2). The Senate President and the Speaker of the House can be impeached by special investigating committee of their peers, and then removed by an adequate vote margin. There is nothing these two Legislature leaders can do - including not convening Senate or House sittings - to prevent their removal if their peers are determined to do the removal act. They can appeal to the Judiciary to claim abuse of process, but they are unlikely to prevail.(3). The case of the CJN is totally different. Only the NJC which he chairs can discipline him, and if he refuses to call an NJC meeting whereat he sets up a panel to investigate - after hopefully stepping aside for the duration - the nation is stuck. But enter Section 231(4) of the Nigerian Constitution, which empowers the President, who, if he determines that the CJN "for any reason" - presumably moral reasons - cannot discharge his duties, he can be suspended:QUOTE231 (4) If the office of Chief Justice of Nigeria is vacant or if the person holding the office is for any reason unable to perform the functions of the office, then until a person has been appointed to and has assumed the functions of that office, or until the person holding has resumed those functions, the President shall appoint the most senior Justice of the Supreme Court to perform those functions.UNQUOTEThe President did not even need a CCT order to do the suspension, but he went an extra judicial mile to get that order, now triggering a set of events in which now the NJC is investigating ting both the CJN and the Acting CJN that replaced him due to four petitions before it. That is how it should be.As to the innocence or guilt of the CJN, he is presumed innocent until proven guilty, but unless he is protecting his wife's vault of currencies, he does look very guilty if indeed he admitted forgetfulness and oversight in declaring such. He should have suspended himself to let the NJC investigation commence promptly, or else simply resign.Those who claim that since he confessed in written form to ownership of undeclared assets, there is a CCB law that frees him from responsibility are quite interesting. Certainly, at the bottom of every crime is forgetfulness - even of the existence of the violated law itself. One can imagine that the original ibtendment of the law is the firgeting for example a dormant account with one or two hundred naira in them, not the ownership of an island in the Caribbean, three yachts in Malta, and 100 houses at Asokoro. Haba... That is the classic case if forgetting the elephant in the the room.Finally, the elite cacophony in support of the CJN is frightening, with the NBA for example going on a two-day strike for a man most eminently qualified to defend himself. Even Senate President Saraki unilaterally filed a case against the Presidency before the Supreme Court for interpretation of the situation.One hopes that the present situation will lead to another attempt to clean up the Augean stable of our messed-up Judiciary, whose reputation even among themselves for corruption is legendary. An opportunity was lost last time around when a meek effort was done to prove the financial dealings of some lesser judges. We should not let this opportunity slip again.And there you have it.Bolaji Aluko
On Tuesday, January 29, 2019, Salimonu Kadiri <ogunlakaiye@hotmail.com> wrote:--The Judge was caught in a criminal act of failing to declare his assets according to the Code of Conduct Bureau. He has admitted in writing that he forgot to declare his assets consisting huge amount of money in his various bank accounts in Nigeria that are in US dollars, Euro and Naira.Following your logic, a man who has admitted beheading another person has not been caught with the crime of murder until a court of competent jurisdiction has pronounced him guilty. Thus, murder by your own logic is not in the perpetrated action (chopping off another person's head) but in the pronouncement of a Judge. Regrettably, it is your kind of logic which has led to the epidemy of abuse of judicial power in Nigeria whereby murderers, treasury looters and other criminals are pronounced not guilty by bribed judges. It is the era of cash and carry judgment.
You may be correct in assuming that Buhari's appointed acting CJN is worse than the suspended CJN but assumption is the lowest level of knowledge. In the name of justice we need to be confronted with documentary evidence of false or failed declaration of assets by the acting CJN before declaring him a criminal. He may be worse than the suspended CJN but there is no evidence to buttress that assumption and, in fact, it is not intelligent to exonerate the suspended CJN of criminal trespass of CCB Act with the assumption that there are other Judges who are guilty of similar crime but yet to be caught and arraigned.S. Kadiri
Från: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com <usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com > för Chidi Anthony Opara, FIIM <chidi.opara@gmail.com>
Skickat: den 28 januari 2019 17:31
Till: USA Africa Dialogue Series
Ämne: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Today's Quote".....any self-respecting Judge caught in an immoral act loses the moral right to sit in judgement over others. He should honorably resign!"(IBK).
IBK,
The Judge in question has not been "caught". He can only be said to have been "caught", if found guilty by a court of competent jurisdiction(you are supposed to be telling me this).
Preliminary background check on Buhari's CJN however, revealed worst!
CAO.
--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
No comments:
Post a Comment