In this article, the Convener, Access to Justice (A2J), Joseph Otteh faults the reinstatement of Justice Gladys Olotu by the National Judic...
In this article, the Convener, Access to Justice (A2J), Joseph Otteh faults the reinstatement of Justice Gladys Olotu by the National Judicial Council (NJC)
Reinstatement of Justice G. Olotu: Again, NJC Fails Test of Mitigating Spiraling Loss of Public Confidence in Nigeria's Judiciary*
*Introduction*
In 2014, The National Judicial Council ("NJC") under the leadership of Hon. Justice Aloma Mariam Mukhtar recommended the compulsory retirement of Justice Gladys Olotu of the Federal High Court ("FHC"), and President Jonathan accordingly removed her from office. Justice Olotu was removed, on grounds, amongst others, that she failed to deliver judgment in a suit eighteen (18) months after final addresses, in contravention of constitutional stipulations requiring judgments be delivered within a ninety (90) day period after hearing.
Justice Olotu challenged her compulsory retirement, and, at the Appeal Court, got a reprieve. In February 2022, the Court of Appeal ruled that her compulsory retirement was unconstitutional, given that, in the court's view, the Federal Judicial Service Commission which recommended her appointment did not recommend her removal from office. The court however, made no order of reinstatement and the NJC has appealed the Judgment to the Supreme Court. The NJC ordered the reinstatement of Justice Olotu in January 2022 and she has been reabsorbed into the FHC.
*The Question of Compliance With the Court of Appeal Decision*
The question of whether a person can exercise judicial office is a highly sensitive one with important consequences for the justice system and constitutional rights, and this sensitivity must be borne in mind on all occasion. With respect to the Court of Appeal judgment in Justice Olotu's case, the NJC could have decided, in the absence of any specific order of immediate reinstatement of Justice Olotu;
A. To await for the decision of the Supreme Court following its appeal to that court.
B. Direct, where it recalls her, that no cases be assigned to Justice Olotu for adjudication pending the hearing and determination of its appeal. (This is the procedure adopted when the Council has recommended the removal or compulsory retirement of a Judge while awaiting the formal removal by the President or State Governor.)
These are not possibly the only options, but clearly strike a balance between the need to respect court judgments and preserve important values at the heart of the judicial function.
*Reinstatement a Violation of Right to a "Manifestly" Independent and Impartial Court*
Sec. 36(1) of the Nigerian Constitution provides that every person is entitled to fair hearing by a court or tribunal that is "constituted in such manner as to secure its independence and impartiality." Compelling litigants to appear before, and be judged by persons found guilty of serious misconduct, or who have clouds of doubts hanging over their integrity, and who cannot therefore, earn their trust, arguably violates litigants' rights to fair hearing, given that the court is not constituted in ways or by persons who can provide the requisite constitutional assurances to them.
*Directive Will Again Thicken Negative Perceptions of Judiciary's Image and Also Demonstrates the NJC Lacks Vision and Resolve to Rebuild Sagging Public Confidence in Judiciary*
The decision of the NJC to reinstate Justice Olotu is a poor, unimaginative one that will cause further embarrassment to the Judiciary as well as intensify and prolong the poor perception of the Judiciary by the public and international community. The NJC's directive in Justice Olotu's case, follows on the heels of another recent (NJC) decision which directed the reinstatement of Justice Ofili Ajomogobia who was earlier removed for corruption.
Unrelenting decisions to recall and reinstate Judges removed for misconduct appear to give the impression that the Judiciary has turned full circle against its own idiosyncrasies, and no longer holds itself to any distinctive standard of conduct, rectitude and accountability, which are universal markers of judicial office. In court decisions and elsewhere, the Judiciary has said, time and time again, that a court's authority is premised on public confidence. Yet the NJC is doing everything it can to damage that confidence and undermine that authority!
More so, the NJC's decisions underlie and reflect a deeper, more insidious problem - the lack of resolve and will by the Council to repair and win back badly damaged public confidence in courts of justice. In spite of the crisis bedeviling the Judiciary in recent years, leading up to the removal of a Chief Justice of Nigeria, the extensive range of indictments against Judges and Justices of courts, and relentless deprecatory commentary on the performance of Nigerian courts, the NJC has not formulated an inspiring strategy and programme of action to re-engage the Nigerian public and show that it is getting its act together. The NJC has been on its back foot on the pressing need to make the Judiciary a more accountable and ethical institution, and its missteps are badly hurting the image of otherwise hardworking and conscientious Judges and Justices in its midst.
To mitigate the effect of its decision to reabsorb Justice Olotu, *Access to Justice urges the NJC to direct immediately that no cases be assigned to Justice Olotu, pending the hearing and determination of the appeal before the Supreme Court.*
Joseph Otteh is the Convener, Access to Justice ( A2J)
Convener
No comments