JUSTICES

‘MY PRESENCE THREW SUPREME COURT JUSTICES OFF BALANCE,’ OMIRHOBO REPLIES OKUTEPA,

Activist-lawyer, Chief Malcolm Omirhobo has chided fiery senior lawyer, Mr. Jibrin Okutepa SAN for upbraiding him over his sensational appearance at the Supreme Court in religious attire laced with lawyers’ paraphernalia.

Reacting to a CITY LAWYER interview where Okutepa lampooned the human rights activist as a mere attention seeker, Omirhobo berated the former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Prosecutor at the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) for finding fault with his veiled protest, adding that “It is not true that the Supreme Court Justices did not notice me as Mr. Jibrin said.”

Giving a blow-by-blow account of what transpired on that day, Omirhobo also said that “it would have been contemptuous of me to stand up to address the court as suggested by Mr Jibrin without first seeking the permission of the court or without being called upon by the justices to speak.”

The full text of his response as posted on his Facebook page reads:

MY APPEARANCE AT THE SUPREME COURT AND JIBRIN OKUTEPA SAN CONCERNS. BY CHIEF MALCOLM EMOKINIOVO OMIRHOBO.

Kindly share :

My attention has been drawn to the post of Mr. Jibrin Samuel Okutepa, SAN concerns on my appearance at the Supreme Court of Nigeria making the rounds in the social media and consequently it is important that I clear the air .

I attended the supreme court as a legal practitioner as of right to observe proceedings and not to appear for any party . In the circumstance it would have been contemptuous of me to stand up to address the court as suggested by Mr Jibrin without first seeking the permission of the court or without being called upon by the justices to speak.

On whether the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC), can or will sanction me for dressing and appearing in the mode and manner prescribes by my religion before the Supreme Court? The answer is NO because according to the Supreme court of Nigeria by virtue of section 38 of the Nigerian constitution every Nigerian is entitled to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, and freedom (either or in community with others, and in public or in privacy) to manifest and propagate his religion or belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance. This my right cannot be wished away just because some other persons feel uncomfortable with it.

The way I dressed to the Supreme court constitutes an act of worship, hence the refusal to allow me to put on my traditional outfit on my lawyers uniform will be a clear infraction of my constitutionally guaranteed right .

On that faithful day , I arrived the Supreme Court Complex at about 9am and by the time I finished addressing a press conference it was about 11 am . I then proceeded to enter the court room . By the time I got there the justices of the Supreme Court were on recess . As I made my way into the court room , the policemen and other security operatives at the entrance of the court tried to stop me but I refused and forced my way in and sat down at the bar on the third roll because the first two rolls were already occupied. When the justices reconveyed (sic) they saw me and were discomfited and had to abruptly rise after hearing an application which they struck out .

It is not true that the Supreme Court Justices did not notice me as Mr . Jibrin said . They did . Every lawyer knows that the bench from their vantage position in courts are able to view the bar and the gallery as well as monitor the activities in their courts . On this occasion I was sitting at the third roll dressed with painted face , feathers in my wig , tying a red cloth , with beads and calabash around my neck and cowrie’s on my wrist and jibrin say that the justices did not see me ? Haba! There is God oooo.

Practicing lawyers and litigants will bear me witness that no composed judge not to talk of the justices of the apex court will spare an improperly dressed lawyer that enters their court not to even talk of sitting at the bar . The reaction of the justices after seeing me goes to show that they were taken aback if not three things would have happened , the first is that they would have stood me up and lambasted me after which they will throw me out of their court . The second is that they would have cited me for contempt and the third thing is that the justices would have ordered that I be sent to a Psychiatric Hospital to check my mental state . But none of these happened .Feeling my presence in their court , the justices read the handwriting on the wall and let me be . I must however commend them for their maturity and discernment .

Granted without conceding that the justices of the supreme court did not see me, the question now is what did the learned silk that saw me do ? Nothing because he too like the justices was discomfited . As a member of the inner bar ranking higher than myself in the legal profession, what is expected of him with the other four Senior Advocates of Nigeria that he claimed were present in court was for any of them to approach me to find out what the problem was and if my responses are not satisfactory then they
would have asked me to leave with support of the other members of the bar . Mr. Jibrin Samuel Okutepa, SAN did nothing, only for him to go to the social media to seek relevance .

I am not in anyway introducing religion in our profession as suggested by the learned silk but helping to develop it. Importantly too I did not attend the supreme court to make trouble but to celebrate with the justices of the supreme court for their recent judgement permitting every Nigeria to dress in public places as prescribed by their religion .

I shall continue to exercise my fundamental rights to freedom of thought , conscience and religion as enshrined and guaranteed in the Nigerian constitution and as affirmed by the decisions of the Supreme court of Nigeria by appearing the way I did at the Supreme Court in other courts . Nobody can deprive me of my fundamental rights because it will be illegal, unlawful and unconstitutional to do so .

I advised the learned silk to save his Bible verses until he sees the Daniel in me in no distant time because I believe that action speaks louder than words.

To join our Telegram platform, please click here 

COPYRIGHT 2022 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag. To ADVERTISE in CITY LAWYER, please email citylawyermag@gmail.com or call 08138380083. All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

BODY OF BENCHERS WADES INTO SUPREME COURT CRISIS

The Body of Benchers has waded into the crisis rocking the Supreme Court of Nigeria, CITY LAWYER can authoritatively report.

Rising from its emergency meeting yesterday, multiple sources told CITY LAWYER that the body set up an Advisory Committee on the Judiciary towards resolving the sensational face-off between the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Tanko Muhammad and about 14 justices of the apex court who penned a damning protest letter against Muhammad.

The Chairman of the Body of Benchers, Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN also told a national newspaper that “We held an emergency meeting today (Tuesday) and for now, we have set up a Body of Benchers Judiciary Advisory Committee. It will be a standing committee of the Body of Benchers and the Chair of the committee is Justice Mahmud Mohammed, former Chief Justice of Nigeria.

“I am a member and the Vice Chairman of the Body of Benchers is a member and four others. We are swinging into action. We are talking to parties concerned, individually and collectively.

“For now, we are advising that they should sheath their swords. The immediate objective of the committee is to resolve the impasse while the ultimate objective is to work out an acceptable package for judicial officers all over the country, particularly judicial officers in superior courts.”

He added, “The committee has also been mandated to compare and contrast what the judicial officers take as their remuneration among others with what is obtainable in other parts of the world.

“The committee will confront the executive with what we derive as the best condition of service, remuneration, among others, as obtained by other countries of the world. The CJN cannot do this; the organogram tilts against the independence of the judiciary as we want it.”

Speaking on the debacle, Olanipekun said: “For now, we want them (Supreme Court justices) to sheath their sword. The committee will swing into action immediately.”

CITY LAWYER recalls that in a protest memo, the justices had demanded an explanation on their entitlements under Muhammad, saying that their annual foreign training had been blocked by the CJN.

They also protested over poor welfare packages which they claimed had hindered their jobs. The apex court, they said, has been receiving N110 billion yearly since 2018, even as they raised issues of non-replacement of poor vehicles; accommodation problem; lack of drugs at the Supreme Court clinic; epileptic electricity supply to the Supreme Court; increase in electricity tariff; no increase in the allowances for diesel, and lack of internet services to residences and chambers.

Others are non-signing of amended Rules of Court for almost three years; sudden stoppage of two to three foreign workshops and training per annum for Justices, and absence of qualified legal assistants.

The jurists accused Muhammad of junketing abroad with his wife, children, and cronies while denying them similar perquisites of office, adding that “In the past, justices were nominated to attend two to three foreign workshops or training per annum with accompanying persons for reasons of age. Since your Lordship’s assumption of office, Justices only attend two workshops in Dubai and Zanzibar. They were not accorded the privilege of travelling with accompanying persons as was the practice.

“Your Lordship totally ignored this demand and yet travelled with your spouse, children, and personal staff. We demand to know what has become of our training funds, have they been diverted, or it’s a plain denial.”

The justices stated that “Your Lordship may also remember that the National Assembly has increased the budgetary allocation of the judiciary. We find it strange that in spite of the upward review of budgetary allocation, the court cannot cater for our legitimate entitlement. This is unacceptable.”

The justices berated Muhammad, saying his alleged weak leadership had drastically lowered the standards for which the nation’s highest court was known.

But in his response, the Chief Justice of Nigeria in a scarcely veiled chastisement of his colleagues, described the escalation of their grouse into the public space as “akin to dancing naked at the market square by us with the ripple effect of the said letter.”

Titled “Re: State Of Affairs In The Supreme Court And Demand By Justices Of The Supreme Court,” the rebuttal stated that “When a budget is made, it contains two sides, that’s the recurrent and the capital, yet all the two are broken down into items. The Federal Government releases the budget based on the budget components. And it’s an offence to spend the money meant for one item for another.

The response noted that infrastructural work is ongoing in the Supreme Court as budgeted, adding that “security and water supply are adequately provided for his brother Justices in their offices and residences. During the period of pandemic, a profound and extra-care was maintained to avoid causalities among them as well as the staff generally. It would have amounted to an act of irresponsibility to divert money meant for the above for otherwise.”

According to the CJN, “The accusation so far, in summary is that more or all ought to have been done and not that nothing has been done; which is utopian in the contemporary condition of our country.”

He countered the allegation of lack of legal assistants, saying that “All the Justices of this Court has (sic) at least a legal assistance, except some may opt for more.” He added that “Generally the Judiciary is looking up to recruitment of more legal assistance and other supporting staff this year.”

He stated that aside from the death of two Supreme Court Justices and the retirement of four staff which “cost the court some funds in the forms of gratuities and allowances,” “Two weeks ago, eight Supreme Court Justices were nominated for a workshop in London as the court cannot take all of them there at once otherwise the job would suffer. They would be going in batches. Accommodations are being gradually provided for the few that are yet to get. There is none of the Apex Court Justices without SUV and back up cars. If any of them were purchased but refurbished, the external and internal auditors are here in the court to take those that bought them up over it.

“The high cost of electricity tariff and diesel are national problem. The Chief Registrar might have budgeted for N300 per litre but diesel is now selling for over N700 per litre and therefore has to find a way around it without even bringing it to the attention of the CJN. But there is no way the generator would be put off if the Court is sitting.

“The amendment of court rules is on the process, it has to be critically reviewed to avoid conflict with the constitution and other extant laws. Not all the CJN has reviewed the rules in the past. Within the three years his brother Justices mentioned came the pandemic and the judiciary workers’ strike.

“The internet services have been restored to Justices’ residences and chambers, just as some allowances have been paid to them. The CJN held a meeting with his brother Justices last Thursday and another one is due to hold this week.

“The general public should be rest assured that there’s no hostility or adverse feelings amongst the Justices of the Supreme Court, as everyone is going about his normal duty.” The CJN’s statement was issued by Ahuraka Yusuf Isah, his Senior Special Assistant (on Media}.

To join our Telegram platform, please click here 

COPYRIGHT 2022 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag. To ADVERTISE in CITY LAWYER, please email citylawyermag@gmail.com or call 08138380083. All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

  • EMEKA NWADIOKE
  • Nov 02, 2021
  • 648
  • 0
  • Comments Off on JUSTICE ODILI RAID: GADZAMA WANTS CULPRITS PUNISHED, HAILS NBA

JUSTICE ODILI RAID: GADZAMA WANTS CULPRITS PUNISHED, HAILS NBA

The pioneer Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Section on Public Interest and Development Law (SPIDEL), Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama (SAN) has urged the Federal Government to fish out and punish all those found culpable in the controversial raid on the residence of Justice Mary Odili of the Supreme Court.

In a statement made available to CITY LAWYER, Gadzama condemned “in very strong terms, the raid on the residence of Honourable Justice Mary Peter Odili, JSC, and make bold to aver that it is a siege on the sanctity of our nation’s judiciary, rule of law and the doctrine of judicial independence. This must not be left to go unpunished. I further call for an urgent investigation to help fish-out the perpetrators.”

The chartered arbitrator commended the NBA leadership “for issuing a statement, and with the speed of light too, therein condemning such act of rascality and taking further steps to convene an emergency meeting of the NBA National Executive Committee solely to discuss this issue and take a definitive stand on behalf of the NBA.”

He also praised the Olumide Akpata-led NBA on the successful conduct of the recently concluded Annual General Conference (AGC) in Port Harcourt,

Below are the statements by Gadzama.

STATEMENT OF CHIEF JOE-KYARI GADZAMA, SAN ON THE RAID OF JUSTICE MARY ODILI’S RESIDENCE BY UNIDENTIFIED SECURITY OPERATIVES

1. On Friday, the 29th day of October, 2021, while in Port Harcourt for the Annual General Conference of the Nigerian Bar Association, I received with much disappointment the news of the raid on Honourable Justice Mary Peter Odili’s residence. I have waited patiently to read further on the possible justifiable rationale for such gestapo show of might, but all to no avail. It is now more than 48 hours after the said raid and information is still scarce and far in-between as to the rationale for the raid on the residence of the second most senior judicial officer in Nigeria. It is a case of loud deafening silence and a game of blame-game. No one, seems to be claiming responsibility and no one seems to be offering further explanations on who is/was responsible for such dastardly act of rascality and impunity aimed at soiling the garment of our judiciary.

2. These trends of habitual unjustified raids on the residences of Judicial Officers, the concomitant unexplained reasons and continuous rape of due process, spell imminent doom and anarchy if not urgently arrested. Lest our collective silence be misinterpreted as our collective approval, this is a further call that the tenets upon which our society was founded be restored: rule of law. We must take heed to the words of Martin Luther King Jnr, when he said that the “the ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people”. The danger of our silence in the face of apparent injustice and anarchy cannot be overemphasized; it is the utmost form of betrayal.

3. I must therefore commend the Nigerian Bar Association, under the leadership of Olumide Akpata, for issuing a statement, and with the speed of light too, therein condemning such act of rascality and taking further steps to convene an emergency meeting of the NBA National Executive Committee solely to discuss this issue and take a definitive stand on behalf of the NBA. While I commend this initiative, I must emphasize that all must be emphatic that it is gravely unpardonable to assault, trample upon, attempt to intimidate and/ or harass the judiciary which is the last hope of the common man. Indeed, injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

4. It is even more abhorrent that the rationale for the present raid on Hon Justice Mary Peter Odili’s residence has not been explained or justified, the incident could therefore only be interpreted as an attack on the Judiciary, possibly designed to intimidate and ridicule the Judiciary.

5. We must remember that Nigeria’s democracy is not made up of only the executive, but the legislature and the judiciary. Borrowing from the words of Caroline Kennedy, which now reflect the needs and realities of our space, “the very bedrock of our democracy is the rule of law and that means we have to have an independent judiciary, judges who can make decisions independent of the political winds that are blowing.” An independent judiciary is indeed the crown jewel of any democracy and Nigeria is no different.

6. As the Pioneer Chairman of the NBA Section on Public Interest and Development Law (SPIDEL) whose commitment is towards maintenance of public law and order, the very fulcrum upon which the society stands and thrives, I condemn, in very strong terms, the raid on the residence of Honourable Justice Mary Peter Odili, JSC, and make bold to aver that it is a siege on the sanctity of our nation’s judiciary, rule of law and the doctrine of judicial independence. This must not be left to go unpunished. I further call for an urgent investigation to help fish-out the perpetrators.

God Bless the NBA,
God Bless the Judiciary,
God Bless Nigeria.

I wish to congratulate us all on the successful conduct of the 61st Annual General Conference of our dear Association, the Nigerian Bar Association.

I must specifically thank the National Officers of our dear Association under the able leadership of our indefatigable President, Mr Olumide Akpata, the TCCP ably led by Mr. Omubo V. Frank-Briggs and the Local Organizing Committee for the exceptional leadership exhibited in ensuring the success of this conference.

This year’s conference is undoubtedly exceptional as it is embedded with so many takeaways that are beneficial to us as members of this profession in our personal and professional lives and as citizens of our dear Country, Nigeria to which we have a duty to serve with all our strength.

It is my wish and prayer that we will all make use of what we have learned at this auspicious conference and help in implementing all the panaceas proffered towards repositioning our great profession and by extension, the Country at large. There is no better time than now to do this.

As we travel to our various destinations to continue taking the lead, I wish us all a pleasant and safe trip back home.

Copyright 2020 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag. To ADVERTISE in CITY LAWYER, please email citylawyermag@gmail.com or call 08138380083. All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

WHY COURT OF APPEAL JUSTICES MUST NOT ACT IN VAIN

The appointment of the latest batch of Court of Appeal Justices has been strewn with controversies, not least the claim that the interviews conducted by the National Judicial Council was perhaps shambolic. Just when justice sector stakeholders thought that the ghost of the troubled exercise was to be laid to rest with the scheduled swearing-in of the justices, the ceremony was postponed indefinitely ostensibly to enable the new justices “clear their desks in their various offices.” In this piece, KAYODE OGUNDAIRO posits that on the strength of the undisturbed judgement of the Supreme Court in OGBUNYIYA v OKUDO, any judicial acts done by the justices after their appointments would be a nullity and liable to being set aside on appeal.

The indefinite postponement of the swearing-in of the newly appointed justices of the Court of Appeal came to many as a shock, not least because of the reason adduced for the aborted exercise. This is a purely judicial matter outside the remit of the National Judicial Council (NJC).

If “clear their desks in their various offices to ensure that there are no outstanding issues before they assume their new responsibilities” suggests that the Justices should proceed to deliver judgments/rulings or discharge any other judicial role in the Federal High Court/High Court/ National Industrial Court under the guise of ‘clearing their desks”, that would, with great respect, amount to an exercise in futility on the strength of OGBUNYIYA v OKUDO (1979) 9 SC 32 as recently reinforced by UDEOGU v FRN.

OGBUNYIYA v. OKUDO dealt with provisions impari materia with ss. 283(2) and 290(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) which are crystal clear.

238 (2): “The appointment of a person to the office of a Justice of the Court of Appeal shall be made by the President on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council”.

290 (1): A person appointed to any judicial office shall not begin to perform the functions of that office until he has declared his assets and liabilities as prescribed under this Constitution and has subsequently taken and subscribed the Oath of Allegiance and the Judicial Oath prescribed in the seventh Schedule to this Constitution.

In OGBUNYIYA v OKUDO, the submission of Chief F.R.A. Williams on behalf of the Appellants, was that by virtue of the appointment of Nnaemeka-Agu J. (as he then was) as expressed in Exhibit SC.1, he ceased to be a Judge of the High Court of Anambra State on the 15th June, 1977, two days prior to delivery by him of the judgement on appeal.

The reaction of Mr. Afolabi Lardner (of counsel) for the Respondents was that until the Learned Judge was sworn in as Justice of the Court of Appeal, he was precluded by virtue of Section 128 of the Constitution of the Federation No. 20 of 1963 from entering upon the duties of his office, so that in the absence of evidence that he had on or prior to the 17th of June, 1977 been sworn in as a Judge of the Federal Court of Appeal, he was on that date still a Judge of the High Court of Anambra State.

The Supreme Court construed Section 128 of the Constitution of the Federation No. 20 of 1963 as amended by section 1(c) of the Schedule to The Constitution (Amendment) (No. 2) Decree No. 42 of 1976 (impari materia with s. 290(1) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended) which made it imperative that “a Judge of the Federal Court of Appeal” shall not enter upon the duties of his office unless he has “taken or subscribed the Oath of Allegiance and such oath for the execution of the duties of his office as may be prescribed by Parliament”.

Allowing the appeal, the Supreme Court set aside the judgment delivered by Justice Nnaemeka-Agu (after his appointment as JCA but before he took the requisite oath) and ordered a trial de novo.

The Supreme Court held thus:

“A close look at Section 128 of the Constitution (No. 20 of 1963) as amended by the Schedule to Decree No. 42 of 1976 shows clearly that the section is intended to lay down a condition precedent to the functioning but NOT the appointment of a Judge. That section impliedly recognises the fact of appointment (already as a Judge) of the incumbent of that public office but makes the swearing of the prescribed oaths condition precedent to his functioning in that office. The language of the section reads:
“A Judge of the Supreme Court, Federal Court of Appeal and of the High Court of Lagos NOT a person appointed to be a Judge of the Supreme Court, Federal Court of Appeal and of the High Court of Lagos shall not enter upon the duties of his office (not, be it noted, enter upon his office) unless he has taken or subscribed the Oath of Allegiance and such oath for the due execution of his office as may be prescribed by (Italics supplied by Court).
… The language of section 128 aforesaid is directed to the entering by a judge (not by a judge designate) upon the duties of his office (not, upon his office).

This should ordinarily rest the matter.

Copyright 2020 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag. To ADVERTISE in CITY LAWYER, please email citylawyermag@gmail.com or call 08138380083. All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.