Conflicting Court Orders: Can CJN Bite?

While many Nigerians are in support of the decision of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun to set up a panel to probe judges of the federal and state high courts involved in conflicting rulings in political cases rocking Rivers State, they are skeptical on the capacity of the NJC to implement severe sanctions against erring judges

Recently, the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun moved to restore sanity in the judiciary when she set up a panel to probe judges over conflicting orders in political cases rocking Rivers State.

Among those summoned to face a panel of the National Judicial Council (NJC) include both the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court and the Chief Judge of the Rivers State High Court.

Conflicting court orders had trailed the local government elections that were held in the state recently. While the state High Court, presided over by Justice I. Igwe on September 4, 2024, ordered the state’s Independent Electoral Commission (RSIEC) to conduct the local government elections in the state using the 2023 voters’ register compiled by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), a Federal High Court in Abuja presided over by Justice Peter Lifu on September 30 restrained INEC from releasing the voters’ register to RSIEC, technically stopping the parties from going ahead with the polls.

Similarly, while the court in Abuja recognised the Martins Amaewhule-led faction of the Rivers State House of Assembly loyal to the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory and immediate past governor of the state, Nyesom Wike, on the other hand, a high court in the state gave the faction led by Victor Oko-Jumbo, who are on the side of Governor Siminalayi Fubara, the legal imprimatur to continue to conduct legislative affairs of the state.

Both the heads of the courts and the judges involved in the conflicting orders are to defend themselves before a panel that would be headed by a retired Justice of the Court of Appeal.

Though the NJC had yet to issue a statement on the matter, a top source at the council confirmed to THISDAY that the CJN has taken steps to address the ugly situation.

“What I can tell you is that the CJN is deeply worried about the whole situation and it is a standard procedure for the NJC to query the judges and heads of their respective courts. Remember that the CJN is barely a month in office, and she had, on many occasions, expressed her determination to wield the big stick against erring judicial officers,” the source said.

Whether it is on the emirship tussle in Kano State or others, legal and political pundits, on many occasions, have frowned at the questionable role of some judges who have become part of the challenges facing the country’s democracy with their conflicting orders, especially those by courts of coordinate jurisdiction. To them, if the trend was not stopped, it could set the country on fire.

Since Nigeria enthroned democracy in 1999, judges are increasingly being derided because observers feel that justice is given to the highest bidders. The resultant effects, according to them, are the vague, contradictory and incongruous judgments that emanate from the courts. Hardly are judgments or orders in sensitive business and political cases delivered without allegations of compromise.

Many Nigerians are disappointed that corruption and influence-peddling have permeated the judiciary. What they have seen over the years is that instead of the third arm of government to use their judgments and orders to straighten the path of progress for the country, judicial officers themselves want to deep their hands into the cookie jar.

Some powerful politicians are believed to have some corrupt judges in their payroll. These judges hear cases in which they have interest and favourable judgments are guaranteed.

It is, therefore, not surprising that certain identified judges have consistently delivered judgments that favour certain powerful politicians. The activities of these politicians and their compromised judges are a threat to Nigeria’s democracy.

Justice administration is a very serious business, and the judiciary, as an institution, derives legitimacy from the implicit confidence reposed in it by the masses over whom it sits in judgment. 

When the impression, real or perceived, is created that high net-worth individuals can approach the courts to procure judgments and orders at the expense of less-privileged members of the public, then the foundations of the justice system would have been eviscerated.

While successive CJNs as the chairmen of the NJC had refused to take decisive actions against judges who indulged in these ignoble actions, the incumbent, Justice Kekere-Ekun after she was sworn in as substantive CJN, had vowed to restore the dignity and integrity of the judiciary for Nigerians to have confidence in the third arm of government.

Specifically, Justice Kekere-Ekun warned that there would be consequences for conflicting judgments for both judges and lawyers who go on forum shopping.

But will the NJC under her watch be able to wield the big stick against the erring judges?  

Sadly, at its 105th meeting last May, the council, rather than come down hard on judges found wanting of infractions, imposed sanctions that were merely considered insufficient to serve as a deterrent to the compromised judges.

Observers have often wondered why in the last few months there hasn’t been any order sought by one of the parties in the Rivers State crisis at the Federal High Court in Abuja that was not granted.

 For instance, all the cases filed by one faction of the members of the Rivers State House of Assembly were strangely heard in Abuja when most of the plaintiffs were in Port Harcourt. 

It was for this reason perhaps that human rights lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana (SAN) recently requested the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho to reassign the case filed by the Martin Amaewhule-led faction of the Rivers State House of Assembly against the Rivers State government and others over the withholding of funds meant for local governments to the Port Harcourt Division of the court.

Falana through his law firm, Falana and Falana, representing the 9th and 10th defendants in the current suit, in a letter dated October 25, 2024, argued that the Port Harcourt Division has the territorial jurisdiction to hear the case, as the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd defendants have offices in Port Harcourt, while the remaining parties reside there.

Furthermore, the law firm expressed concerns about the likelihood of bias in the Abuja Judicial Division, recalling that the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, an interested party, had earlier announced plans to give lands and build houses for judges in Abuja.

Since this is the first the new CJN, Justice Kekere-Ekun has set up a panel to probe infraction in the judiciary, many Nigerians are waiting to see if the outcome would curb the rot in the judiciary or it would be business as usual under watch.