Wednesday’s confirmation of the appointment of Justice Walter Onnoghen as the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) by the Senate, making him the first person from the southern part of the country to occupy the office in the last 30 years after Justice Ayo Irikefe, has ended weeks of controversies and jurisprudential expeditions on the veracity or otherwise of the appointment of the eminent jurist.
Onnoghen, who hails from Cross River state, was inaugurated by President Muhammadu Buhari as acting CJN on November 10, 2016 on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council (NJC) following the retirement of Justice Mahmud Mohammed. After the recommendation by the NJC, the president was required, by constitutional provisions, to forward the appointment to the Senate for confirmation. After Senate’s confirmation, the President is expected to swear in Onnoghen as the substantive CJN.
But events leading to his acting appointment by Mr. President and subsequent confirmation by the Senate had almost created a constitutional logjam as well as sentiments bordering on politics and regionalism, thus unnecessarily overheating the polity. Consequently, the Acting President, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo, on February 7, 2017 wrote to the Senate, asking for legislative approval for the appointment of the new CJN.
The letter read, “Following the recommendation of the National Judicial Council, I hereby notify you of the appointment of the Honourable Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen (CFR) as the Chief Justice of Nigeria.
“The Senate President is requested to kindly present the said appointment of the Honourable Justice Onnoghen for confirmation by the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria pursuant to Section 231(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”
The first three-month tenure of Justice Onnoghen in acting capacity had expired on February 10, 2017, three days after Osinbajo transmitted his appointment to the Senate for confirmation.
At the screening, which lasted over one hour, Onnoghen addressed several issues raised by the lawmakers about Nigeria’s judiciary. Deputy President of the Senate, Ike Ekweremadu, raised the issue of the time frame within which political matters were dealt with by the courts.
He said, “My lord, I am sure you are aware that prior to 2010, election matters took four to five years to conclude; sometimes beyond the lifespan of the tenure of the incumbent. But after, we amended the constitution, giving a time frame to deal with that.”
In his submission, Chairman, Senate Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters, Senator David Umaru, recalled some major cases Onnoghen presided upon, alluding to the fact that judgments delivered by the CJN might have led to the delay in his nomination and appointment.
Onnoghen, in his response, said, “The fear of me not exhibiting the uncommon courage that had earlier been exhibited; I assure you that I remain whom I have been on the bench right from the beginning and I intend to end that way by the special grace of God.”
Majority Leader, Senator Ahmad Lawan, also said there were some recent cases of corruption charges against some officials in the judiciary. “Tell us how you intend to, within this period, reform the judiciary and bring back the confidence of the public because some people would feel our judicial system is under a heavy question mark of integrity, but we need to do something to regain the confidence of the public.”
In his response, Onnoghen said there had been a “tremendous” improvement in the judiciary. He explained that last Wednesday was set aside for a special panel, apart from the regular panel of the Supreme Court, to deal with pre-election matters.
“Already, as I came on board, for instance, I have passed different circulars to all the heads of the Nigerian judiciary in the country to send me details of pending matters on corruption, matters on terrorism and high profile criminal matters”, he said.
We reiterate our view in an earlier editorial entitled, “Onnoghen’s Augean stables” (Blueprint November 27, 2016), to the effect that for Onnoghen to succeed there is the need for him to vigorously pursue the establishment of the much touted special courts to try corruption cases. This is because within special courts, cases stand great chance of being disposed of quickly.
Moreover, trials within special courts would be more rapidly processed than within the regular courts. Again, by its ad hoc nature, special courts may not follow the same procedural rules as general-jurisdiction courts. This may appear draconian, but it is in line with the maxim that desperate situations require desperate remedy.
We wish the new CJN, who is expected to be sworn in immediately by the Acting President, a successful tenure.
