CJN, Walter Onnoghen
In the last couple of days, Nigerians have been engaged in hot
discussions and disagreements about the direction of our politics and
governance. The most discussed topic is that President Muhammadu
Buhari’s unilateral suspension of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice
Walter Onnoghen, over unproven allegations of under-declaration of
assets.
While the discerning majority see through the illegality, breach of
due process and discountenancing of separation of powers, a few members
of the minority who see and hear no evil about the President who now
acts like an emperor continue to justify the aberration. Clearly, an
abuse of presidential and executive powers has crystallised.
It is imperative to state that law is an instrument of justice; it
facilitates social engineering through the resolution of societal
conflicts and the central theme of law and justice is to treat like
cases alike and different cases differently. Nigerians are entitled to
equality before the law and equal protection of the law. No one is above
the law and no one is to enjoy any advantage or suffer any disadvantage
simply because of their religion, sex, ethnicity, etc. in the
implementation of any law, policy or administrative action. Thus,
discrimination is outlawed except on the grounds clearly stated and
cognisable under the clawback clause of the 1999 Constitution.
Central to the abuse of presidential powers is the issue of
blackmail and using the law as an instrument of fighting the opposition.
Nigerians will recall that after the internal intrigues in the ruling
All Progressives Congress led to the emergence of Senator Bukola Saraki
as the Senate President, he was charged to the Code of Conduct Tribunal
over allegations of asset declaration. He was maligned, abused and
humiliated until the Supreme Court discharged and acquitted him. The law
was set in motion to force and blackmail him to resign from the exalted
office. He was even asked by the former APC chairman, John
Odigie-Oyegun, to resign as the Senate President and once he resigned,
the party would ensure that the case at the CCT would be discontinued.
Today, the presidential abuse of powers in relation to Justice
Onnoghen still has the same imprimatur of the CCT. It appears that the
CCT is the available forum for manipulation and settling political
scores.
Why is this so? It is a matter of common knowledge that the CCT
chairman, Danladi Umar, is legally and morally challenged. He has been
investigated for corruption and a prima facie case established against
him. A former Attorney General of the Federation, Mohammed Adoke, had
sought to prefer a charge against him for extorting money from persons
appearing before the CCT but did not get it through before he left
office. During the Saraki trial, the issue of whether Danladi Umar was
fit and proper to continue presiding over the CCT came up and the
Federal Government through the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission
defended his continued stay in office.
However, in a twist to the Umar story and in February 2018, the
EFCC filed charges of fraud against Umar. The charges, prepared by
Festus Keyamo, an EFCC prosecutor, came two years after the anti-graft
agency absolved the same Umar of any wrongdoing in a case of judicial
bribery and racketeering. Court filings published by the media indicated
that Umar collected N10 million from Rasheed Taiwo, a former Customs
official who was facing false asset declaration charges before the CCT
sometime in 2012. The prosecution also accused Umar of receiving N1.8
million of the N10 million bribe sum through one of his personal
assistants, Gambo Abdullahi. The two counts of fraud contravened Section
12(1) (a) and (b) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences
Act, 2003. The offences he was charged with attract up to seven years in
prison. These charges were filed after Umar did not find Saraki guilty.
In the typical manner of the present Federal Government, the story
moved into the dramatic mode as the Attorney-General queried the
chairman of the EFCC and Keyamo, the prosecutor. The contents of the
query as reported in the media are to the effect that: “The attention of
the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation was drawn to news
report that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission has filed
charges of corruption against the chairman of the Code of Conduct
Tribunal, Hon. Justice Danladi Umar, before the High Court.
I am directed by the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation
to seek clarification from you as to whether the charges were filed on
your instruction or directive and if in the affirmative, what is the
compelling basis for doing so. This clarification becomes imperative in
view of the following background facts. The commission’s investigation
report dated 5th March 2015 addressed to the Secretary to the Government
of the Federation stated as follows: ‘the facts as they are now against
Justice Umar raised a mere suspicion and will therefore not be
sufficient to successfully prosecute for the defence’.
Kindly accord this letter top priority while your prompt response
within 48 hours from the receipt of same is required in the
circumstances.”
This high wire politicking led to the discontinuation of the prosecution.
However, the complainants in the case have not withdrawn their
complaint. It is just that the state refused to prosecute. So, what is
happening now? The Attorney-General refuses to prosecute Umar but treats
him as a vulnerable person who can be blackmailed and maligned at any
point in time. He either obeys the will of his blackmailers or he will
be in the dock to answer for the charges with the overwhelming evidence
against him.
This is how low the administration of criminal justice has sunk in
Nigeria. If this is not the case, no reasonable person can understand
what will make a person trained as a legal practitioner and who presides
over a Tribunal to adjourn a motion on notice for argument and
purportedly later, hears the motion ex-parte and issues far-reaching
orders including the ones the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to make.
How
can a legal practitioner who is not suffering blackmail issue orders at a
time the jurisdiction of his Tribunal is challenged and the decision on
jurisdiction is to be made after the motion has been canvased by the
parties already before the Tribunal?
In the circumstances, even if we are to go by Buhari’s
jurisprudence as reflected in his speech that purportedly suspended the
CJN, Umar should be allowed go and clear his name before continuing to
preside over a Code of Conduct Tribunal. From the very strong prima
facie case already made out against him, he is no longer a fit and
proper person to continue to preside over an ethics Tribunal like the
CCT.
Leaving him on the seat and continually blackmailing him is a great disservice to the rule of law and constitutional democracy.
The disciplinary body of the legal profession should take steps to
call Umar to order because the abuse of powers was done in his capacity
as legal practitioner considering that he is not a judicial officer. The
legal profession must defend its honour and integrity.
-Written by Eze Onyekpere
0 comments:
Post a Comment