DSS raids and NJC inaction
The Department of State Services [DSS] took President Muhammadu Buhari’s anti-corruption campaign to the doorsteps of the judiciary last Friday and Saturday, October 7 and 8 with the arrest of seven judges and a hint that eight more were being targeted for questioning. The judges arrested included Supreme Court justices Sylvester Ngwuta and Inyang Okoro; […]
The Department of State Services [DSS] took President Muhammadu Buhari’s anti-corruption campaign to the doorsteps of the judiciary last Friday and Saturday, October 7 and 8 with the arrest of seven judges and a hint that eight more were being targeted for questioning. The judges arrested included Supreme Court justices Sylvester Ngwuta and Inyang Okoro; suspended Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeal’s Ilorin Division Justice Mohammed Tsamiya; Justice Kabiru Auta of Kano State High Court and Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court, Abuja. Also arrested were a former Chief Judge of Enugu State Justice I. A. Umezulike and Justice Mu’azu Pindiga of the Federal High Court, Gombe Division.
DSS said it resorted to the commando-style midnight arrests because of the National Judicial Council’s (NJC) reluctance to bring the judges to book even after the agency provided evidence of corruption against them. DSS and NJC had exchanged many letters since April on the need for the judges to report at DSS headquarters but NJC used many technicalities and prevented them from honouring DSS’ invitations.
Though DSS obtained arrest warrants before invading their lordships’ houses, we cannot but frown at the manner in which it went about carrying out the arrests. It was crude, uncouth and uncivilized for the security operatives to invade the homes of judges in the wee hours of the night in order to execute the arrests. What the department tagged a ‘sting operation’ could have been accomplished in the day time and with more decorum. Furthermore, DSS failed to put other security agencies in the picture of their assignment, leading to a clash with the police in Port Harcourt during the efforts to arrest Justice Liman Mohammed of the Federal High Court, Port Harcourt Division. The confusion could have led to unnecessary bloodshed between DSS operatives and men of the Nigeria Police Force.
Questions must also be asked as to why DSS was used in this operation, rather than the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission [EFCC] or the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, ICPC. Those two agencies have a more direct mandate to investigate, arrest and prosecute public servants and Nigerians in general who are suspected to have been involved in corrupt practices and money laundering. DSS is essentially a counter-espionage agency and it should ideally concentrate on fighting insurgents and militants.
In spite of these operational oddities, we support the move to bring judges who are accused of corruption to book. Over the years, there have been outcries over the massive corruption in this third arm of government, as apparent miscarriage of justice, odd judicial pronouncements and granting of amorphous ex-parte motions have confused Nigerians. The sing-song, therefore, has been that for the Judiciary in this part of the world, it is justice for sale. No wonder some judges live in luxury and swim in vanity, far above what their legitimate earnings could pay for.
NJC, which is constitutionally responsible for the disciplining of judges, is seen by Nigerians as a toothless bulldog. It drags its feet over judicial corruption cases and judges found wanting only receive a slap on the wrist. The impression created is that judicial officers cover up for one another and allow corrupt judges to enjoy the proceeds of their misdeeds while ordinary Nigerians dragged before courts for corruption have their properties confiscated and they are also jailed. It is a travesty indeed that a judge accused of receiving a N250 million bribe should be recommended for retirement with full benefits.
The confidence of Nigerians in NJC’s capacity to enforce discipline in the Judiciary has been shaken. It is therefore time to consider amending the constitution to invest the powers to discipline judges on another, more independent agency. In the meantime, before the rules are amended, we urge the Executive Branch to patiently adhere to them.