By Onyewuchi Ojinnaka (Senior Correspondent)
Access To Justice (AJ) a Lagos based non-governmental human rights and advocacy group has faulted the decision of the Court of Appeal Lagos division which nullified the prosecution of Hon. Justice Hyeladzira Ajiya Nganjiwa by the Federal Government of Nigeria through its anti-graft agency the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC)
Justice Nganjiwa, a federal high court judge was prior to Appeal Court judgement last Monday, standing trial before Justice A. A. Akintoye of Lagos State High Court Igbosere on charges bordering on alleged corrupt practices.
Reacting to the judgement, the Executive Director of Access To Justice, Joseph Otteh, disagreed with the reasons adduced by the appellate court for nullifying the trial of the judge.
In a statement signed by Otteh, titled: “We beg to disagree”, he said; “We have just read about the decision of the Lagos Division of the Court of Appeal which was read by Hon. Justice Obaseki Adejumo. The summary of the ruling from media reports is that anti-corruption agencies cannot arrest or prosecute any Judge(s) for any offences committed in the discharge of their functions until the National Judicial Council has first “stripped” the Judges of their “judicial standing”.
“With respect, we do not agree with the opinion. The ruling has grave implications for the ability of law enforcement agencies to function freely without hindrance and seriously infringes on the doctrine of separation of powers and the rule of law that recognizes that each branch of government is independent of the other and should function independently, without one branch seeking the permission of the other to execute the duties of its department”.According to Otteh, his interpretation of the judgement suggests essentially that law enforcement agencies must not execute their responsibilities when it involves Judicial Officers until the National Judicial Council has, in essence, given them permission to do so.
He posited that the decision will have negative derivative consequences.
“It would mean that, at the level of the States, no Magistate, Kadi, Area or Customary Court Judge can be investigated by law enforcement agencies until the State Judicial Service Commission has first “stripped” such a “judicial officer” of his or her “judicial standing”.
The same goes with court employees who are under the disciplinary control of State Judicial Service Commissions, he wondered.
In the understanding of Access To Justice’s executive director, it would also mean that no member of the police force could be investigated or prosecuted for any crimes committed in the course of discharging their functions until the Police Service Commission has first stripped them of their “standing” as police officers.
The same too for public officials whose agencies retain a disciplinary body with powers of oversight on their conduct.
Otteh faulted the constitutional basis or justification for this decision, with respect to the Court of Appeal, arguing that it is contestable.
“Even the NJC itself, as we understand it, has not asserted an exclusive or pre-eminent right to discipline erring judicial officers first before anti corruption agencies can do their work.
“It is important to remember that not all sanctions of the NJC result in the stripping of the “judicial standing” of a Judge and Judges can be “warned” only, with nothing further recommended against them. Additionally, the NJC does not “remove” a judge from his or her office.
“It can recommend the removal of Judges, but it is ultimately the head of an executive branch (the President or State Governor) that does the removing of the judicial officer.
“Until that is done, the NJC has adopted the practice of “suspending” any erring judicial officer. So what the Judgment may mean is that unless a Judge is effectively removed from office by the President or Governor, law enforcement agents cannot do their work. And where a Judge is not so removed, their work cannot also be done.
“The Judgement of the Court of Appeal will not advance efforts to reform the Judiciary and fight the vices that have persistently undermined it”. Otteh averred.