Connect with us

News

Imo Guber Verdict: Recuse Yourselves, PDP Tells CJN, Others

Published

on

The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has told the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad that he, for the sake of fairness, should recuse himself from the hearing of the review application on the Imo State governorship election petition.
The main opposition also demanded that six other justices of the Supreme Court, who delivered the earlier judgement that sacked the its candidate, Emeka Ihedioha as the Imo State governor January 14, recuse themselves.
The party said the Justices who should not be involved in the matter again are Nwah Sylvester Ngwuta, Justice Olukayode Ariwola, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, Justice Amina Adamu Augie, and Justice Uwani Musa Abba Aji.
The Supreme Court has fixed, today for the hearing of the application for review in its judgement that saw Senator Hope Uzodinma of the All Progressives Congress (APC), declared winner of the state’s governorship election
The PDP made its decision known in a letter to the CJN, dated February 14, 2020.
The letter was signed by PDP National Chairman, Prince Uche Secondus, and National Secretary, Senator Ibrahim Tsauri.
The party made the demands on the grounds of likelihood of bias and the need to ensure fair hearing, adding that it was to ensure that fairness and justice is not only done, but also seen to have been done.
The letter said in part, “As a follow up to our earlier call on all members of the panel to recuse themselves, we have now sought to formalise that request or demand.
“We hereby request that the seven persons that heard the case earlier recuse themselves from participating in the consideration of this new application.
“We are not unmindful of the fact that a litigant cannot dictate to the court the panel that should hear its case. However, due to the extraordinary circumstances and the nature of this case, we think that our request is a fair one that meets the justice of the case.
“Consequently, we feel it as our patriotic duty to hereby humbly request that your Lordship constitute a different panel of this great court (other than the one that delivered the judgement) for the purpose of hearing this application.
“Your Lordship would recall that a panel of Hon. Justices of the Supreme Court presided by your good self on Tuesday the 14th day of January, 2020, delivered judgement on the above appeal.
“Your Lordship may further recall that on February 5th, 2020 the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) filed an application praying that the judgement of 14th January, 2020 be set aside on grounds of nullity of the judgment, among other grounds.
“The judgement sought to be set aside has generated so much misgiving not only among lawyers but in the general polity as a whole because of the uncertainty it has introduced into our electoral jurisprudence, its potential for crisis in our democracy, the irreconcilability of the calculations contained therein and their resultant effect.
“At the heat of the moment, the party addressed a press conference and expressed its displeasure and disagreement with the judgement, and called on the Justices that heard the case to recuse themselves during any possible future review of the case that may come before the court, the party even went further to ask the President of the court to even resign.
“As a follow up to our earlier call on all members of the panel to recuse themselves, we have now sought to formalise that request or demand. We hereby request that the seven persons that heard the case earlier recuse themselves from participating in the consideration of this new application.
“My Lord, our request is founded on Section 36(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, which guarantees fair hearing to every citizen or entity in the determination of his rights or obligations.
“Furthermore, the time honoured and tested principles of natural justice, particularly that no man shall be a judge in his own cause is particularly relevant to this solemn request.
“Allegation of bias or likelihood of bias goes to the root of fair hearing. Denial of right to fair hearing is a logical consequence of bias in any proceeding before a court or a tribunal.
“The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as Amended (Constitution) guarantees the right of an individual to fair hearing. An individual’s right to fair hearing includes the right to have his/her rights and obligations determined by an independent and impartial tribunal.
“The above is clearly enshrined in Section 36 (1) of the Constitution, which provides as follows: ‘In the determination of his civil rights and obligations, including any question or determination by or against any government or authority, a person shall be entitled to a fair hearing within a reasonable time by a court or other tribunal established by law and constituted in such manner as to secure its independence and impartiality’
“The right to an independent and impartial tribunal is a major factor in determining if fair hearing has been observed by a court.
“The relevant question on the issue of bias is what an ordinary man on the street would think about the fairness of the proceedings conducted by judges accused of likelihood of bias.
“We may even be wrong on the allegations made against the learned justices of the Supreme Court that sat on the case in question. We may have been bitter about the clearly observed inadequacies in that judgment, but this is now beside the point.
“The relevant question is: can any reasonable person who heard the press conference and several protests by the party, the Civil Society Organisations and Nigerians generally, all over the country, including foreign embassies, the involvement of even the international community, feel that the same panel that has been the subject of these allegations, rightly or wrongly by the Party, can sit and deliver impartial justice on the same case on review? We think not.”
Meanwhile, the National Working Committee of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP0, yesterday, claimed that the Supreme Court was misled in sacking Emeka Ihedioha as the governor of Imo State.
This is even as the party said there were facts not tabled before the apex court before it went ahead to declare the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, Senator Hope Uzodinma winner of the governorship poll.
The National Chairman of the party, Prince Uche Secondus, who stated this in an interview with a select team of journalists in Abuja, yesterday, said the PDP and Ihedioha would avail the justices of the facts at its sitting in the nation’s capital today.
Secondus said it was wrong for Uzodinma to claim that the time within which the court was permitted to entertain the case which emanated from election petition had passed.

Continue Reading

News

Bill For Compulsory Counselling For Convicted Corrupt Nigerians Scales Second Reading

Published

on

A bill to amend the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act 2000 has passed its second reading in the House of Representatives.
The bill, which mandates compulsory counselling and training for individuals convicted of corruption-related offences, was sponsored by Kayode Akiolu (APC-Lagos) during plenary on Wednesday.
Leading the debate, Mr Akiolu explained that the bill sought to amend Section 67 of the principal act, introducing new provisions that were not part of the original section.
“These additional provisions, found in subsections 2, 3, and 4 of the amendment bill, require judges and magistrates to not only impose imprisonment and/or fines on those convicted of corruption but also mandate a minimum four-week anti-corruption counselling and training.
“The counselling and training will be designed and delivered by the Anti-Corruption Academy of Nigeria (ACAN) and aims to address the psychological factors related to corrupt behaviour,” Mr Akiolu said.
Mr Akiolu emphasised that the training would help reform convicts by addressing their corrupt tendencies and could even transform them into advocates for anti-corruption efforts.
He added that this approach aligned with the reformative aspect of the criminal justice system, which focused on punishment and rehabilitation.
“As per subsection 4, the bill allows magistrates and judges to order convicts to cover the cost of their counselling and training, preventing additional financial burdens on the government,” the lawmaker noted.
Mr Akiolu further argued that if the bill is passed into law, it would strengthen the country’s fight against corruption.
Given the widespread negative impact of corruption, he urged the House to support the bill for the country’s benefit.
Following the debate, Speaker Tajudeen Abbas referred the bill to the relevant committee for further legislative consideration.

Continue Reading

News

Judiciary, Media Key Pillars Of Democracy, Says CJN

Published

on

The Judiciary and the Media are key pillars of democracy, the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, has said.
Kekere-Ekun made this statement in her address at the 2024 National Conference of the National Association of Judiciary Correspondents (NAJUC).
The CJN was represented by Mr Abdulaziz Olumo, the Secretary of the National Judicial Institute (NJI).
“ The judiciary and the media occupy unique and complementary roles in any democratic society.
“ The judiciary serves as the guardian of justice, equity, and the rule of law, the media acts as the conscience of society, disseminating information, shaping public opinion, and ensuring accountability.
“ Together, these institutions provide checks and balances that strengthen the fabric of democracy,” she said.
Quoting Felix Frankfurter, a former U.S. Supreme Court Justice, she said: free press is not to be preferred to an independent judiciary, nor an independent judiciary to a free press. Neither has primacy over the other; both are indispensable to a free society.”
The CJN said this dynamic interdependence between the judiciary and the media presents opportunities and challenges alike.
“ The media is entrusted with the responsibility of informing the public about judicial activities, the judiciary relies on accurate and ethical reportage to enhance public confidence in its work.
“ However, the inherent power of the media to influence public opinion requires careful management, especially when its focus turns to judicial proceedings.
“ The question posed by Robert J.Cordy, a former Associate Justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, is pertinent here: “What happens when the free press turns its sights on the courts-scrutinizing, sensationalizing, and exposing the frailties of the judiciary while questioning its ethical standards and performance?”
“The media’s capacity to shape narratives and perceptions is undeniable” she said.
Quoting Jim Morrison , she said “Whoever controls the media controls the mind.”
According to her, this underscores the immense responsibility placed on journalists to report truthfully, fairly, and objectively.
“ Unfortunately, the commercialisation of news and external influences have led to the rise of sensationalism-a practice that distorts facts, erodes trust, and undermines the very essence of journalism.
“ Sensationalised headlines, such as the infamous 2016 headline “We raided the houses of ‘corrupt, unholy’ judges, says DSS,” can paint a skewed picture of the judiciary and its officers. Such reporting, often devoid of context, compromises the integrity of the justice system and misleads the public.
“ Closely tied to this is the issue of “trial by media,” where premature and often biased media narratives prejudge cases and infringe on the constitutional rights of individuals” she said.
She added that as Mahatma Gandhi rightly observed, “The sole aim of journalism should be service.” It is imperative for media practitioners to remain steadfast in their commitment to truth and objectivity.
To this end, she advised, the National Association of Judiciary Correspondents to take proactive steps to regulate the activities of its members.
“ This is not merely about enforcing rules but about fostering professionalism and safeguarding the credibility of the media.
“ The judiciary and the media must work as partners in progress.
“ To bridge the gap between these institutions, there is a pressing need for constructive engagement and mutual understanding.
“ Courts can provide the media with guidelines on judicial processes, courtroom decorum, and the nuances of court proceedings.
She noted that globally, courts have adopted initiatives to support the media’s role in reporting judicial matters.
For instance, she said the Supreme Court of Dakota’s media guide outlines protocols for courtroom reporting, while the UK ‘s Media Guidance document provides clarity on access and etiquette for journalists.
“ These examples demonstrate how structured collaboration can enhance the quality of judicial reportage.
“ In Nigeria, we can take a cue from these models by developing a comprehensive media guide tailored to our judicial landscape.
“ This initiative, which would involve inputs from NAJUC and judicial stakeholders, would not only enhance media access to courtrooms but also ensure that judicial activities are accurately and responsibly reported” she said.
She advocated that judiciary correspondents must make deliberate efforts to familiarise themselves with the rules and procedures of the courts.
She added that understanding these frameworks will enable journalists to navigate the complexities of judicial proceedings effectively and responsibly.
“ Training programs such as this conference play a crucial role in equipping judiciary correspondents with the knowledge and skills needed to report judicial matters accurately.
“ The theme of this year’s conference, “The Role of Courts in Enforcement of Judgments,” is both timely and significant, as it addresses an aspect of judicial work that is critical to upholding the rule of law and ensuring justice.
“ I commend NAJUC for its commitment to promoting accountability and transparency through its engagements with the judiciary.
“ As I conclude, I must emphasize the importance of credible journalism in strengthening public trust in the judiciary” she said.
She urged judiciary correspondents to prioritise the pursuit of truth and objectivity, resist undue influences, and remain steadfast in their commitment to ethical standards.
She commended the leadership of NAJUC, under the chairmanship of Mr Kayode Lawal, for its efforts in promoting professionalism among judiciary correspondents.

Continue Reading

News

Senate Issues Arrest Warrant Against Julius Berger MD Over Road Project

Published

on

The Senate has issued an arrest warrant for the Managing Director of Julius Berger Nigeria Plc, Dr Peer Lubasch, to appear before its Committee on Works.
The Tide’s source reports that the warrant was for Lubasch to explain the utilisation of funds appropriated for the reconstruction work on Calabar-Odukpani-Itu highway.
The warrant followed the adoption of a motion sponsored by Sen. Osita Ngwu (PDP- Enugu) and co-sponsored by Sen. Asuquo Ekpenyong (APC-Cross River) and Sen. Mpigi Barinada (PDP- Rivers) at plenary in Abuja, yesterday.
Ngwu, in the motion said, that the senate had mandated the committee on works to conduct investigation into the state of road infrastructure across the country.
He said that in furtherance to the investigative hearings, Julius Berger refused to honour invitations to provide details of its role in the Calabar-Odukpani-Itu highway project, in spite of receiving substantial public funds.
He said that this was worrisome, given the alarming discrepancies in performance among contractors on the project, with specific reference to Julius Berger for failing to meet delivery timelines.
Ngwu said it was the constitutional powers of the National Assembly under Sections 8 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, to conduct investigations on any person or organisation responsible for administering public funds.
He said that the powers set out in section 6 of the legislative powers and privileges act empowered the Senate to issue warrants of arrest on persons in contempt of its proceedings.
The Tide source reports that the senate further ruled that President of the Senate, Godswill Akpabio, should sign the warrant, mandating the Julius Berger managing director to appear on a date to be communicated.
Akpabio said that the senate’s decision was in line with its constitutional powers under Section 89 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
“This senate will not tolerate the continued disregard of its authority.
“The managing director of Julius Berger must appear before the relevant committee, failing which further actions will be taken as prescribed by the constitution.
“The point of order, which was supported by the majority of the senators, highlighted the importance of upholding the integrity of the legislature.
“The senate committee will submit its findings to the National Assembly after the MD’s appearance.
“If there is any further failure to comply, we shall take the necessary steps to ensure respect for the constitution and the rule of law,” Akpabio said.

Continue Reading

Trending