Justice Ayo Salami
The National Judiciary Council (NJC) Thursday suspended the President of the Court of Appeal (PCA), Justice Ayo Salami, for refusing to apologise to the council and the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Aloysius Katsina-Alu, after a panel of the council found him to have lied against the CJN.
The council further recommended to President Goodluck Jonathan that Justice Salami should be retired from the Bench.
The council also recommended Justice Dahiru Musdapher to Jonathan to succeed Katsina-Alu who retires on August 28.
The NJC in a statement signed by its Director of Administration, Mr. E.I. Odukwu, directed Salami to hand over to the next most senior justice of the Court of Appeal.
The statement reads: “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 at 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.”
Paragraph 21 of the 3rd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution as amended provides that “the National Judicial Council shall have power to - (b) recommend to the President the removal from office of the judicial officers specified in sub-paragraph (a) of this paragraph and to exercise disciplinary control over such officers.”
The council did not make any reference to the suit filed by Salami at the Federal High Court in Abuja wherein he is challenging the report of the Justice Abdullahi panel which investigated him and Katsina-Alu for alleged misconduct.
Another sub-committee of the NJC, headed by the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta, recommended that Salami should tender a written apology to both Katsina-Alu and the council.
The Auta committee also recommended that Salami should be cautioned. A letter of caution had already been sent to him.
In arriving at its decision, the council, based on the Auta panel’s recommendation, found Salami in breach of Rule 1(1) of the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers.
The rule provides: Rule 1: “A Judicial officer should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all his activities. (1) 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.”
Salami refused and headed for the court. In the suit, Salami is asking the Federal High Court in Abuja to set aside the proceeding and findings of the investigation panel headed by Justice Abdullahi, (rtd.) and the recommendation of the panel headed by Justice Auta.
He asked the court to declare that the setting up of the NJC Investigation Committee and its composition were in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, and his constitutionally guaranteed right to fair hearing under Section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and is therefore unconstitutional, null and void.
He listed as defendants the following: the NJC; Justice Dahiru Musdapher; Justice Katsina-Alu; Justice Abdullahi; Justice Emmanuel Ayoola; Justice Dominic Edozie; Justice Michael Akpiroroh; Mrs. Rakia Sarki Ibrahim; Justice Auta; Justice Kate Abiri; and Justice Peter Umeadi.
Three Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) - Chiefs Akin Olujinmi, Rickey Tarfa, Adeniyi Akintola - filed the case on behalf of Justice Salami.
He asked for the following declarations, among others:
*A declaration that the NJC Investigation Committee chaired by Abdullahi lacked the competence to investigate the petitions against the plaintiff having regard to its composition.
*A declaration that the proceedings of the NJC Investigation Committee were conducted in substantial breach of the principles of natural justice and fair hearing as guaranteed under Section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999(as amended) and the proceedings are therefore unconstitutional, null and void.
*A declaration that the findings of the NJC Investigation Committee chaired by Abdullahi as contained in the ‘Investigative Panel Report’ dated 6th July 2011 submitted to the NJC and addressed to Musdapher are perverse, unreasonable, and violates the fundamental rights of the plaintiff to fair hearing, guaranteed under Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and the African Charter on Human and Peoples Right; and,
*A declaration that the NJC Investigation Committee and the three-man panel set up by the NJC and chaired by the 9th defendant (Auta panel) being administrative bodies, have no power to pronounce on the veracity of facts or statements contained in the statements on oath sworn to before the court of law or pronounce facts contained in statements on oath to be false as such power is exercisable only by a competent court of law.
In the supporting affidavit deposed to by Salami, he explained in details how Justice Katsina-Alu called him to his office in the presence of Justice Musdapher and asked him to disband to the Sokoto Election Appeal Panel.
He said: “On the 8th day of February 2010, 3rd defendant (Katsina-Alu) invited me to his chambers at the Supreme Court complex in Abuja and in the presence of the 2nd defendant (Musdapher) requested me to direct the panel to dismiss the Sokoto appeal.
“I informed the 3rd defendant that he could not direct the panel to dismiss the appeal or how to decide the case before them, since the justices of the Court of Appeal and indeed all justices in Nigeria had taken oath of office to administer justice without fear or favour, affection or ill will, and I subsequently left the office of the 3rd defendant.
“On 15th February, 2010, 3rd defendant again invited me to his chambers wherein he directed me to disband the panel set out to hear the appeal, a request which I refused.”
He said that before he was appointed as PCA, his predecessor in office, Abdullahi, had refused to constitute a panel to hear the Sokoto Election Appeal.
He said: “That the 4th defendant (Abdullahi) as the then PCA had failed, refused or neglected to constitute a panel of the court to hear the appeal for over 18 months despite letters and protests to that effect by the appellants in the said appeal and members of the Bar.”
Reacting to the development, Mr. Bamidele Aturu, in a statement, said: “What the NJC has done is nothing but a farce. First, the NJC evaded service, then, it pronounced definitively on a matter that is pending in court. What nonsense? We will not allow this act of primitive lawlessness to stand.
“Those who desecrate the temple of justice are not entitled to any protection or respect from civilized citizens. Somehow, somewhere I hope against hope that the news is a rumour. I call on all decent Nigerians to condemn the farcical illegality.
The NJC should withdraw the putrid and offensive decision. The suspension of Justice Salami is unacceptable, atrocious, evil, illegal, unconstitutional, irresponsible and cannot stand.”
Also reacting, human rights lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana, described the NJC action as illegal, arguing that it does not have the power to suspend Salami. “They can only recommend disciplinary action,” he said.
He contended that if the council could suspend the PCA, it could as well retire him instead of making a recommendation to President Jonathan.
Advertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users
We are watching
ReplyDeleteJustice for the highest bidder...up naija! Fresh air carry go
ReplyDelete