Follow Us on Google
“My grief comes in waves and is usually triggered by something arbitrary.”
–Michelle Zauner
By Omoniyi Salaudeen
The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad, must have been caught napping when some six judges of courts of coordinate jurisdiction literally turned themselves into a pawn in the game of power politics, giving conflicting orders on ex-parte applications by the gladiators in the leadership crisis rocking the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). For whatever accounts for the seeming tardiness in calling for immediate restraint, the judiciary under his watch has got more than what it bargained for in terms of public opprobrium and disapproval.
For the umpteenth time, the judiciary as a sacred institution and fulcrum of democracy suffered a huge embarrassment for the disdainful act. In ordinary legal parlance, this is what some lawyers in their scathing criticism would call Jankara judgment, a sort of derisive joke.
It’s akin to a season of anomie. Left to fester, money-bags among the state actors will not mind approaching any court of the land to purchase the judgment that would be favourable to their aspiration at the detriment of the nation’s budding democracy. The PDP had instigated the current round of judicial hara-kiri following the internal dissension within the members of the National Working Coming (NWC) of the party which compelled Mr Ibeawuchi Alex and three others to file an ex-parte application at the River State High Court asking for the removal of Prince Uche Secondus as the national chairman. Accordingly, Justice Okogbule Gbasam of the Degema Judicial Division, who presided over a vacation court in Port Harcourt, granted an interim order, restraining Secondus from parading himself as the National Chairman and member of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), pending the determination of the substantive suit. The order also restrained the embattled national chairman from participating in any activity of the party whatsoever whilst on suspension as a member of the party pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.
And in what looks like a chain of reaction, the Kebbi State High Court in Birnin-Kebbi, ruling on a counter ex-parte motion filed by Yahaya Usman, Abubakar Muhammad, and Bashar Suleman issued an order restoring Uche Secondus as the national chairman of the PDP, “pending the hearing and determination of the applicant’s motion on notice.”
The tragic comedy-drama rapidly and successively reverberated in Cross River, Anambra, Jigawa, and Imo states high courts until Monday when the CJN took to action by issuing a query summoning the six respective chief judges over conflicting orders granted the applicants on the same subject matter.
Embittered by the “huge embarrassment” caused by those who issued conflicting orders upon ex-parte applications by some political parties,” the CJN requested the concerned judges to first appear before him and after which they would face the NJC to explain what informed the issuance of the conflicting orders by courts of coordinate jurisdiction.
The summon reads in part: “My attention has been drawn to media reports to the effect that some courts of coordinate jurisdiction were granting conflicting Exparte Orders on the same subject matter.
“It has become expedient for me to invite you for a detailed briefing on the development. This is even more compelling having regard to earlier NJC warning to judicial officers on the need to be circumspect in granting Exparte applications.”
All these speak to the urgency of the need for the intervention of the NJC to do a thorough self-cleansing exercise for its officers to restore the dignity and integrity of the judiciary. This is even more imperative now that another general election is fast approaching; giving a warning signal that many state actors may not want to stomach any arbitrariness in resolving pre or post-election matters. In the worse scenario, aggrieved candidates could be forced to resort to self-help if their aspiration is unjustly threatened.
It is, therefore, high time the NJC changed the narrative about the culture of impunity and arbitrariness in the dispensation of justice in Nigeria. For its investigation to be effective, it should include the role of the judiciary in the selection of party candidates for the November 6 governorship election in Anambra State as well as other related matters. For the court cannot reprobate and approbate at the same. But, in reality, what some judges do is present themselves as a partisan party in the game of power politics by colluding with politicians to do their biddings.
Already, the Independent National Electoral Commission, (INEC) has raised the alarm over the plot by some desperate politicians to use the courts to frustrate the efforts of the Commission to deliver a credible election in the Anambra State governorship election.
The national Commissioner in charge of Voter Education, Chief Festus Okoye at a recent implementation meeting on voter enlightenment and publicity for the election in Awka, the Anambra State capital, warned that the action of the courts and the politicians could lead to voter apathy during the polls.
He said: “The Commission has variously and consistently complained at the frequency and consistency with which courts of coordinate jurisdiction from different jurisdictions all over Nigeria assumed jurisdiction and delivered judgments and issued orders with far reaching implications on the conduct of the Anambra State governorship election.
“Some of the orders have the tendency of eroding the powers of the Commission and compromising its independence, powers, and timelines for the conduct of the upcoming election.
“It is also becoming increasingly difficult for the Commission to obey court orders and judgments that are the latest in time or the first in time as some of the political parties and the candidates have perfected the art of shopping for the first in time or the latest in time.”
In the run-up to the 2019 general election, the Chairman of the electoral umpire, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, had also raised similar concern, calling on the former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen, to address the spate of conflicting judgments on electoral cases in the country.
“For instance, in a recent leadership crisis in one political party, the Commission was served with six conflicting judgments and orders from courts of coordinate jurisdiction within a short period of three months (May – July 2016). Similarly, the Commission was confronted by conflicting pronouncements by the lower courts on matters already decided by the superior courts, including the Supreme Court.
This is making the work of the Commission very difficult and creating unnecessary negative public perception for INEC and, I must say, the judiciary as well,” he said.
For this recurring decimal, the INEC urged the leadership of the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) and the leadership of the judiciary to wade into this descent to forum shopping and the multiplicity of orders and judgments from courts of coordinate jurisdiction.
“This is urgent; it is imperative and cannot be carried over to the 2023 general election,” the electoral umpire warned.
By all standards, Justice Ibrahim Muhammad (CFR) is in good standing to lead the judicial council in Nigeria to a higher level. Not only that he possesses the requisite qualifications, including a Ph.D. in law. He also has a wealth of experience spanning over four decades.
Following the completion of his first degree law programme at the Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria (1976 to 1980), Justice Muhammad attended the Nigerian Law School from 1980 to 1981. He stared his career as Magistrate Grade II in 1982 with Bauchi State Judiciary and rose through the ladder to become Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria until his appointment as the Chief Justice of Nigeria by President Muhammadu Buhari.
All eyes are now on the NJC at this dark moment of the nation’s history when judges condescend to the point of giving the judiciary a bad name through their arbitrary dispensation of justice. This sad narrative, stakeholders say, calls for punitive sanction.
