Refers petition against Justice Danladi Yakubu Umar of CCT to FJSC
Emmanuel Ukudolo l Tuesday, Jan. 29, 2019
ABUJA, Nigeria – The National Judicial Commission(NJC) has given a 7 working days ultimatum to Chief Justice of Nigeria(CJN), Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen and Acting CJN, Justice Ibrahim Tanko Mohammed to respond to petitions filed against them.
The NJC emergency meeting which was presided over by former President of Court of Appeal, Hon. Mr. Justice Umaru Abdullahi after his election as interim chairman considered three petitions.
They are petition against Hon. Mr. Justice W.S.N. Onnoghen, GCON by Zikhrillahi Ibrahim of Resource Centre for Human Rights & Civil Education; two petitions against Hon. Mr. Justice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad, CFR by Centre for Justice and Peace Initiative and by Olisa Agbakoba, SAN, OON and petition against Hon. Justice Danladi Yakubu Umar, Chairman, Code of Conduct Tribunal by Centre for Justice and Peace Initiative.
The NJC “gives Hon. Mr. Justice W.S.N. Onnoghen, GCON and Hon. Mr. Justice I.T. Muhammad, CFR seven (7) working days to respond to the petitions”, Director of Information, NJC, Mr. Soji Oye said in a statement.
The NJC however refered petition against CCT Chairman, Danladi Yakubu Umar to the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC), who will handle the matter. The NJC will now reconvene February 11, 2019.
“In line with its procedure, Council also forwarded the petitions against Hon. Justices W.S.N. Onnoghen, GCON and I. T. Muhammad, CFR to them for their responses. In view of the gravity of the matters involved, Council abridged the usual response period from fourteen (14) to seven (7) working days for the Hon. Justices to respond”, the NJC said, adding that Hon. Mr. Justice W. S. N. Onnoghen, GCON and Hon. Mr. Justice I.T. Muhammad, CFR recused themselves from the meeting, and consequently council elected Hon. Mr. Justice Umaru Abdullahi, CON, former President of the Court of Appeal as Interim Chairman to preside over the meeting.
According to the NJC, Olisa Agbakoba, a senior advocate of Nigeria (SAN), had written a petition against Danladi Umar, chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), over the continued trial of Walter Onnoghen, chief justice of Nigeria (CJN).
The federal government is prosecuting Onnoghen over alleged false assets declaration. In the petition dated January 29 and addressed to the general secretary of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Agbakoba cited the ruling by the CCT in an asset declaration case against Sylvester Ngwuta, a supreme court judge, as reason the tribunal has no jurisdiction to rule over Onnoghen’s case.
He argued that it is only the NJC that reserve the power to rule on the case of an erring judicial officer and recommend to the president the removal of such officer. He described Danladi’s’s action as constituting a “constitutional crisis”.
“On January 14th, 2019, the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) of which Mr. Danladi Umar is Chairman assumed jurisdiction in a matter against the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Honourable Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen knowing the CCT had no jurisdiction in view of CCT’s own decision in the case of Hon. Justice Sylvester Ngwuta which also involved Asset Declaration,” the petition read.
“The Court of Appeal in Nganjiwa v. FRN (2017) LPELR-43391 (CA) held that allegations of misconduct against a serving Judicial officer must first be referred to and handled by the National Judicial Council (NJC).
“It is only after the NJC has entertained and made a finding or pronouncement on the allegation against a Judicial officer and recommended to the President or Governor as the case may be, the removal of such judicial officer, and the recommendation is accepted and acted upon by the appropriate authority, that the prosecuting agencies of the Federal Government can proceed against such judicial officer to make him face the full wrath of the law”, he said, adding that Mr. Danladi Umar knew the state of the law yet acted otherwise and that Mr Umar’s misconduct has created a constitutional crisis and brought great embarrassment to the Legal profession.
