Last week, the new Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Mahmud Mohammed, joined the clarion call for the separation of the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) from that of the Minister of Justice. Mohammed, who was sworn-in on Thursday by President Goodluck Jonathan following the retirement of Justice Mariam Aloma Mukhtar, said during the senate confirmation that the office of the AGF was political. He said he took up the job of a chief magistrate in his state after serving in the capacity of attorney-general because a chief magistrate was a career with pension and gratuity.
The advocacy for splitting the office of the AGF and minister of justice has been in the front burner of public discourse for some time now. Currently, the justice minister is also the AGF at the federal level while, the commissioner for justice is also the attorney-general (AG) at the state level. The agitation heightened during the President Olusegun Obasanjo administration and partly that of late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua when the then AGF and Minister of Justice, Michael Aondoakaa, played some ignoble roles in the polity, contrary to his role of upholding the constitution.
The office of the A-G and minister of justice is provided for in Section 150 (1) of the 1999 Constitution as amended. It stipulates that, “There shall be an Attorney-General of the Federation who shall be the Chief Law Officer of the Federation and a Minister of the Government of the Federation.” Pursuant to this provision, the AGF is appointed by the President while the governor appoints the AG of the state. Sections 174 and 211 of the 1999 Constitution, respectively, specify the powers of the AGF and AGs of the states.
The provisions empower the AG to, among other things, initiate or discontinue any proceedings before any court of law in Nigeria.
Section 174 subsection 1, 2 and 3 of the Constitution stipulate: “The Attorney-General of the Federation shall have power to institute and undertake criminal proceedings against any person before any court of law in Nigeria, other than a court-martial, in respect of any offence created by or under any Act of the National Assembly; to take over and continue any such criminal proceedings that may have been instituted by any other authority or person; and to discontinue at any stage before judgment is delivered in any such criminal proceedings instituted or undertaken by him or any other authority or person.” As a check, the constitution provides in subsection 2 and 3 that in exercising his powers, the AGF shall have regard to the public interest, the interest of justice and the need to prevent abuse of legal process.
However, these powers have been largely abused by their donees who seem to owe more allegiance to their appointor and the political parties in power than upholding the rule of law and protecting the sanctity of the temple of justice. In fact, “public interest,” the “interest of justice,” and “prevent abuse of legal process” appear to be nebulous concepts for succeeding AGFs and ministers of justice in Nigeria. This unsavoury situation had necessitated the clamour for the separation of the office of the AGF and minister of justice, even by its present occupant, Justice Mohammed Adoke, and the recently concluded National Conference; it is now a subject of constitutional amendment by the National Assembly. The implication of the separation is that the AGF will have a fixed tenure and concentrate on directing the prosecution of federal government cases while the minister of justice will serve as an adviser on legal matters to the federal government. We share the view that this will go a long way in rekindling confidence in Nigeria’s justice system.
