‘Nigerian judiciary has started another golden era’

What is your reaction to Justice Adeniyi Ademola’s judgment?My reaction was, to put it mildly, that we have started another golden era for Nigerian judiciary. After the heroic performance of the judiciary between 2003 and 2004 the steam was taken out of the judiciary by the politicians and the Nigerian judiciary lost focus after the […]

What is your reaction to Justice Adeniyi Ademola’s judgment?
My reaction was, to put it mildly, that we have started another golden era for Nigerian judiciary. After the heroic performance of the judiciary between 2003 and 2004 the steam was taken out of the judiciary by the politicians and the Nigerian judiciary lost focus after the landmark cases like Ararume, Amaechi , Inokoju  and others, the judiciary simply went to sleep and allowed the infractions of politicians.
Look at the judgment given in the case of Buhari Vs. Yar’Adua, that marked the beginning of decay and decline of the Nigerian judiciary. It was a judgment that should have set Nigeria on the path of progress but the judiciary refused to live up to expectation. It was four against three, where ballot papers that were not numbered that were used were allowed to pass; infractions that were so glaring were overlooked. After that kind of political expedience  we can see where it has led Nigeria to; it has led Nigeria to Boko Haram and all these insurgencies because the judiciary failed to live up to expectations  but with the   judgment of Justice Ademola there is hope that our democracy will survive after all.
With the judgment and the filing of an appeal, some said that the swearing in should not have held. What is your reaction?
Those who said that said it out of ignorance. An appeal does not amount to stay of execution. That you filed an appeal does not mean that the judgment should be stayed. Filing an appeal will not deprive the winning party the fruit of his labour. An appeal is not synonymous with a stay of execution. Even where a motion for stay of execution has been filed along with an appeal, as in this case, does it implies that the FHC order cannot be complied with?
The order was given that day and the man was sworn in immediately on that day where would anybody have filed an appeal, filed a motion for stay and serve same personally on the same day; where would he get them to served? Was he residing in the court premises? And in any case, has any stay been granted? No stay has been granted.
What is the implication of Ademola’s judgment on Nyako’s case?
It has no effect whatsoever on Nyako’s case. Nyako’s case would still go its full hog in court.  What we are saying in Nyako’s case is that there were two orders of the court which Fintiri and others did not comply with. The question is, can you put something on nothing and expect it to stand? When the bottom of an action has been knocked off, how can such an impeachment stand? Again when was the impeachment signed? When were the signatures procured? Signatures for the impeachment process were procured from outside the hallowed chambers of the state Assembly. It was the worst set of impeachment that was ever carried out in Nigeria by any legislative arm of government. Everything that was associated with it was faulty. Nyako would pursue his case to a logical conclusion.
What is your take over the development in Adamawa State?
Nigeria is fast becoming a country where anything goes. The whole thing in Adamawa State started in June when the speaker, Ahmadu Umaru Fintiri, went to court where he sought for leave of the court to serve impeachment notice on the governor through substituted service. The court looked at it and said that the decision of the Supreme Court in Ladoja’s case is very clear. Impeachment notice must be served on the governor and deputy governor personally not by substituted means. Rather than going to serve the governor personally Fintiri and the House ignored the order which they themselves sought for and went ahead with impeachment procedure – that was the first wrong step.
The second wrong step came from the judiciary which refused the order that Fintiri sought for, that he should serve by substituted means. The same judiciary was now made to empanel an impeachment panel – the same man who made the order that was flouted was now the same person who constituted the impeachment panel.
The third was when Nyako himself went to court and obtained an order against the speaker and the House of Assembly not to proceed with the impeachment. Fintiri, because of his ambition to become the governor through the back door, ignored an order – making it the second order that he would ignore – he went ahead and impeached the governor.
As if the infraction and impunity was not enough the judiciary was not left out in the person of the Acting CJ. As soon as Fintiri became the acting governor he set up a judicial panel of inquiry to probe Nyako and, behold, he made the Acting CJ the chairman of the panel. It was the same judge who made the order that was disobeyed who constituted the panel and Fintiri made him the chairman of the probe panel.
Does this have any meaning? The same judge who made the first order that was disobeyed now turns out to be the one who constituted the panel to impeach Nyako. When Nyako was impeached, it was the same judge that was made the chairman of the probe panel to probe Nyako. Before the impeachment was carried, out the speaker purportedly forged a letter purportedly written by James Ngilari when James Ngilari did not write any letter nor signed one. So what Nyako did was to join Ngilari to say that Ngilari has never resigned and that he has not received any letter from Ngilari and that was the end of the matter.
That was what happened. In other words there was impunity from the speaker, there was the despicable act from the CJ, there was forging of the letter purportedly written by Fintiri, there was ambition on the part of Fintiri. All these happened under the nose of Nigerians and members of the civil society did not say anything about it. They condoned it. We all became participants criminis in the assault against the constitution of the FRN by Fintiri. Ordinarily, in society where things work, Fintiri should be in jail for what he has done. The Acting CJ himself should not remain a day longer in office if we are in a different society.
Recently the CJN has said that the finality in the governorship election matter should be taken back to the Court of Appeal. Do you agree with that?
With due respect for the CJN, she has her reasons because she wears the shoes and knows where it pinches. As she sits at the apex of the court of the Nigerian judiciary she has seen that governorship election cases have been unnecessarily prolonged. But again, don’t forget where we are coming from. Initially cases affecting governorship elections terminate at the Court of Appeal but there were so many criticisms and that is why they said that Supreme Court should have a say.
Will that not overburden the SC?
All they needed to do is just to amend the rules and I must say that the SC has been alive to its responsibilities. Sometimes they even forgo their break and holidays; they bend backwards to sit till late in the evenings, even on weekends. I feel very strongly that the governorship election petitions should terminate at the SC and not at the CA.
2015 elections are around the corner, do you think we have a perfect law environment for the election?
As it is now there is nothing we can do. We still have to make use of the Electoral Act 2010 during the next elections. Though it is not the best, but we should go the whole hog and adopt the recommendations of the Uwais panel. The onus should be on INEC to show that elections were conducted in order and not on the petitioner as it is presently to defend the result of any election.