The Federal Government has stated
that the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria, CJN, Walter Onnoghen, had passed
his own judgement.
Lai Mohammed, the Minister of
Information and Culture, stated this in a press conference in Abuja on Monday.
He said Justice Onnoghen himself
disagreed with those who argued that the Code of Conduct Tribunal, CCT, was
wrong in ordering his suspension.
Here is the full text of Federal
Government’s position on CCT trial and suspension of CJN Onnoghen:
Gentlemen of the press, thank you
for once again honouring our invitation.
As you would recollect, President
Muhammadu Buhari last Friday complied with the order of the Code of Conduct
Tribunal, directing the suspension of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Hon Justice
Walter Onnoghen, pending the determination of the cases against him at the Code
of Conduct Tribunal and several fora relating to his alleged breach of the Code
of Conduct for Public Officers.
Since then, there have been
widespread reactions from within and outside the country. In particular, the
opposition has latched on to it, threatening fire and brimstone and concocting
all sorts of imaginary scenarios and generally muddying the waters. In what I
will call the theater of the absurd, the main opposition party, the PDP, even
suspended its electioneering campaign for 72 hours! Of course, you must have
seen my reaction to that. I said there is nothing to suspend in a campaign that
never took off in the first instance! So much for the opposition’s hysteria.
Today, I have called this press
conference to set the records straight and redirect the discourse. Contrary to
what the opposition and their ilk have been saying, this is not about the
forthcoming elections, neither does the suspension of the CJN signal the
beginning of dictatorship. President Buhari is an avowed democrat, and this he
has proven time and time again. This Administration stands firm on the rule of
law!
This whole issue is about the
country’s highest judicial officer, the Chief Justice of Nigeria, being accused
of a breach of the Code of Conduct for Public Officers, and the legal and moral
conundrum surrounding that. It is about the suspicious transactions running
into millions of dollars to the suspended CJN’s personal attacks, all
undeclared or improperly declared as required by law. It is about the Hon.
Justice Onnoghen himself admitting to the charges that he indeed failed to
follow the spirit and letter of the law in declaring his assets, calling it a
‘mistake’. And it is about him refusing to take responsibility, instead opting
to put the entire judiciary on trial.
Please remember that Justice
Onnoghen has been given the opportunity of fair hearing, but he has been
abusing his position and the judicial process by filing frivolous applications
and even dodging service of process.
It is regrettable to note that
the media, which should have led the discourse, has not done so. In fact, a
section of the media has taken sides. Several newspapers have written
editorials on this issue.
Some newspapers have employed
rather crude and obnoxious language to
push forth their opinions, while
others have been more tempered. But curiously, none has written from a
perspective that shows that they understand the big picture.
What is the big picture? In the
words of The Right Honourable Sir Alfred Denning, or Lord Denning, then Lord
Justice of the British Court of Appeal, a judge should in his own character be
beyond reproach, or at any rate should have so disciplined himself that he is
not himself a breaker of the law. Still talking of the big picture, some have
suggested that the suspension of Justice Onnoghen is a threat to our democracy
or even the country’s very existence. They are wrong. Again, Lord Denning,
himself quoting the words of Sydney Smith, said: ”Nations fall when judges are
unjust, because there is nothing which the multitude think worth defending.”
Had the section of the media that
I referred to earlier understood the big picture, they
would have framed the debate
differently, rather than work to inflame passion and help those seeking to
muddy the waters.
THE ROLES OF THE NJC AND THE CODE
OF CONDUCT TRIBUNAL
It is unfortunate that in the
ensuing debate, the talk about due process has overshadowed the talk about the
substance. Procedure cannot or should not trounce substance. That brings me to
the role of the National Judicial Council (NJC). Some have argued that the
Justice Onnoghen issue should have been
referred to the NJC to handle. They would have been right if Justice Onnoghen
had been accused of professional misconduct, which is what is within the
purview of the NJC.
The allegations against Justice
Onnoghen go beyond professional misconduct. It is the alleged breach of the
Code of Conduct for Public Officers. And only one body is statutorily empowered
to deal with this: The Code of Conduct Tribunal.
Interestingly, Justice Onnoghen
himself has elucidated on this.In various judgments, he upheld the provisions
of the law concerning the CCT. In one particular judgement he delivered on July
12, 2013, Justice Onnoghen held that the CCT had EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION
(emphasis mine) to deal with all
violations contravening any of the provisions of the Code of Conduct Bureau.
Let me put this in a layman’s language: All breaches of the Code of Conduct for
Public Officers must be handled by the Code of Conduct Tribunal. Pure and
simple. In other words, Justice Onnoghen’s judgement held that the provisions
“expressly ousted the powers of ordinary regular courts in respect of such
violations.”
In a case between Ismaeel Ahmed
and Nasiru Ahmed, Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), Chairman of the Kano
state chapter of the party, and the Independent National Electoral Commission
(INEC), which has been reported by the media, Onnoghen, while interpreting
Paragraph 12 of the Fifth Schedule of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) as
regards CCT’s jurisdiction held that “…the said paragraph 12 provides as
follows: ‘Any allegation that a public officer has committed a breach of or has
not complied with the provisions of this Code shall
be made to the Code of Conduct
Bureau.”
The judgement, which was
delivered at the Supreme Court with suit number ‘SC.279/2012’ before Justices
Onnoghen and others, also held that the provisions of the law are clearly
unambiguous. Justice Onnoghen said that the provisions are, “so construed
literally meaning that any breaches of any provisions of the said 5th schedule
of matters of noncompliance with any provisions of the Code shall be made to
the Code of Conduct Bureau that has established its Tribunal with the exclusive
jurisdiction to deal with any violations of any provisions under the Code.”
Is anyone still in doubt that the
CCT is the right court to try the alleged breach of the Code of Conduct for
Public Officers levied> against Justice Onnoghen? Is it not clear that
challenging the jurisdiction of the CCT to try him is an abuse of court process
by Justice Onnoghen?
As for those who argued that the
CCT is wrong in ordering Justice Onnoghen’s suspension, are they aware that
Justice Onnoghen himself disagreed with them? In the judgement I referred to
earlier, he wrote: “The Tribunal to the exclusion of other courts is also
empowered to impose any punishments as specified under sub-paragraphs (2) (a),
(b) & (c) of paragraph 18 as provided in subparagraphs 3 and 4 of paragraph
18 while appeals shall lie as of right from such decisions to the Court of
Appeal.”
In essence, the CCT is right to
have directed Justice Onnoghen’s suspension, and the President did the right
thing by acting on the orders of the CCT. Needless to say that in many of the
cases of professional misconduct against judges that Justice Onnoghen has presided
over at the NJC, judges have been suspended while still undergoing trial!
Gentlemen, from the foregoing, it
is clear that: a) Contrary to the cacophony of voices that have been muddying
the waters, the CCT was acting within its powers in ordering the suspension of
Justice Onnoghen as Chief Justice of Nigeria, and President Muhammadu Buhari
was right in carrying out the order.
b) The suspension of Justice
Onnoghen is a consequence of his breach of the Code of Conduct for Public
Officers and has nothing to do with the forthcoming elections, neither does it
signify the onset of dictatorship or tyranny as some have insinuated. It
amounts to
irresponsible extrapolation to
say that the suspension of Justice Onnoghen is the onset of dictatorship.
c) A section of the media shirked
their agenda-setting role by failing to objectively lead the discourse on the
issue of the allegation facing Justice Onnoghen and his subsequent suspension.
Certain editorials crossed the acceptable limit of decent discourse and did
little or nothing to enlighten the public on the issue at stake.
d) The opposition, in its
reaction, is guilty of engaging in hysteria and for overheating the polity.
Conveniently, they have anchored their failed campaign for the 2019 election on
an issue that is totally unrelated to the election. By their reaction, they
have made their tattered umbrella available for shielding alleged corrupt
persons.
Their leopard can never change
its spots: The PDP is corruption personified and it’s the only reason for
seeking a return to office is to complete their looting of the national
treasury. The attack dogs unleashed by the opposition have been engaging in
incitement and other actions that can threaten law and order. There is no cause
for alarm, as the law enforcement agencies are alive to their responsibilities
e) The threat of mass action by
some groups cannot undermine the course of justice. More Nigerians are with us
than are with them on this issue, going by the feelers that we are getting from
across the country. Those who want to protest against the suspension of the
CJN should feel free to exercise
their rights, within the limits of the law.
I thank you for your kind
attention.
No comments
Post a Comment
Kindly drop a comment below.
(Comments are moderated. Clean comments will be approved immediately)
Advert Enquires - Reach out to us at NigerianEye@gmail.com