AJULO, OON, SAN ON THE SWEARING-IN OF JUSTICE KEKERE-EKUN AS ACTING CJN AHEAD OF SENATE CONFIRMATION

The swearing-in of Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun as acting Chief Justice of Nigeria ahead of Senate confirmation of her appointment is still generating hot debate in the legal profession. Former Cross River State Governor and lawyer, Mr. Donald Duke had set the debate in motion. Constitutional lawyer and Ondo State Attorney-General, Mr. Kayode Ajulo SAN weighs in on the debate

It is evidently clear that the assertions proffered by Mr. Donald Duke, the former Governor of Cross River State, regarding the swearing-in of Justice Kekere-Ekun as acting Chief Justice of Nigeria, prior to her confirmation, exhibit a profoundly disturbing misunderstanding of the legal framework governing such appointments. One must critically assess how someone can maintain such a political stance with misplaced confidence in his interpretation of the law under these circumstances.

To commence, Section 231(1) of the 1999 Constitution states: “The appointment of a person to the office of Chief Justice of Nigeria shall be made by the President on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council, subject to confirmation of such appointment by the Senate.” This provision empowers the President to appoint an acting Chief Justice when the office is vacant or when the incumbent is incapacitated.

Moreover, Section 231(4) explicitly delineates that until a new Chief Justice has been confirmed and has assumed office, the President is authorised to appoint the most senior Justice of the Supreme Court to fulfil these functions in an acting capacity. Therefore, the swearing-in of Justice Kekere-Ekun is not merely permissible; it is essential for the uninterrupted continuity of judicial leadership.

Furthermore, the assertion that her swearing-in is illegal fundamentally disregards the constitutional provisions that permit such actions during periods of vacancy. While the confirmation process by the Senate is undeniably vital, it does not preclude the President from appointing an acting Chief Justice in the interim. This appointment is temporary, lasting a maximum of three months, as elucidated by Senator Adeniyi Adegbonmire, an SAN and Chairman of the Senate Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters, who dismissed Mr. Duke’s position, affirming, “An acting CJN can only act for three months.” Thus, Mr. Duke’s claim of a fundamental infringement of the Constitution is entirely unfounded.
Moreover, to insist on delaying the swearing-in until confirmation could engender a significant void in judicial leadership, which would be detrimental to the effective functioning of the judiciary.

The Senate’s role is to confirm appointments; any legitimate concerns regarding an appointee should be addressed during the confirmation process, rather than permitting the judiciary to function without leadership

The office of Chief Justice of Nigeria is integral to our democratic governance.
I assert, without equivocation, that the President’s swearing-in of the Acting Chief Justice is constitutionally sound.

Additionally, the Attorney General of the Federation, Prince Fagbemi, SAN is, beyond doubt, one of the most erudite legal minds in the nation. It is disconcerting that some individuals, who cannot be considered a knowledgeable authority on matters of law and constitutionalism, would choose to undermine such a noble office with their jejune arguments.

In conclusion, it is imperative to engage with the legal framework in a thoughtful and precise manner. Such comments, rather than enriching the discourse, reveal a regrettable lack of understanding of the constitutional provisions governing such appointments. It is essential for public figures, particularly those with legal backgrounds, to ensure that their statements reflect a comprehensive grasp of the legal principles at hand.