The Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Mahmud Mohammed has hit back at the Presidency in the war of words between the Judiciary and the Executive over which arm of government is frustrating the anti-corruption war to fail.
Justice Mohammed said if the government appoints competent prosecutors who investigate their cases thoroughly before going to court, a well-prepared case can be concluded in one month without requiring any special court the anti-graft agencies requested.
Ideally, both arms of government need to collaborate to succeed in cleaning the society of the pervasive, filthy, corruption everywhere.
However, President Muhammadu Buhari had slammed the Judiciary accusing it of sabotaging his effort to prosecute high-profile corruption cases.
Vice President Yemi Osinbajo, who represented the President at the opening of the 2015 All Nigeria Judges’ Conference, blamed judicial corruption for the delay in prosecution with some of the cases dating back 10 years.
“Allegations of judicial corruption have become more strident and frequent,” Buhari said, adding: “There is both local and international dissatisfaction with the long delays in the trial process. In the past few years, this has become especially so for high-profile cases of corruption, especially where they involve serving or former political officeholders.”
Buhari had blamed Judicial corruption for the endless adjournments and interlocutory injunctions taken by defence lawyers for the failure of the anti-corruption war.
But CJN Mohammmed hit back Monday, telling the Presidency that lack of political will to prosecute corrupt members of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), as well as current and former political officeholders are the causes undermining the anti-corruption war.
In Mohammed’s words: “Experience within the Judiciary shows that there is abject lack of political will to prosecute some of those cases pending before our various courts almost a decade in some instances.
“It is not because there are no special courts, but mostly for reasons of political expediency and other ancillary considerations.
“There is the need for seasoned prosecutors to prepare and file charges before courts of competent jurisdiction so that criminal matters are timeously determined.”
He reminded the Presidency that the competence of the prosecutors also determine the speed at which cases progress.
“The quality of prosecutions presented in courts by our prosecutorial agencies must be improved upon, as they are sometimes of a standard that will never find a conviction in any court anywhere. Yet, a well-prepared prosecution can see to the determination of criminal matters within a month.
“Of course, no competent prosecutor who has filed valid charges would permit an accused to mount an interlocutory appeal, to the extent of going forth and back, sometimes twice or more to the Supreme Court, since such lapses could be injurious to the dispensation of justice.”