The Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Mahmud Mohammed, on Thursday
said the era of appointing unfit and improper persons as judges had
gone.
He said the National Judicial Council’s newly revised guidelines of
appointment of judicial officers now in force provided for “a more
comprehensive, robust and transparent method of appointment.”
Justuce Mohammed, who spoke at the swearing in of a new Justice of
the Supreme Court, Justice Amiru Sanusi, at the Supreme Court complex in
Abuja, said the new guidelines would ensure “the emergence of only the
best legal minds with high moral standards to serve as judges in our
revered temples of justice.”
Sanusi, who hails from Funtia Katsina State was until his
appointment as a Justice of the Supreme Court, the presiding Justice of
the Enugu Division of the Court of Appeal.
His appointment raises the number of Justices on the apex court bench from 17 to 18.
The CJN, after administering to him the Oath of Office and Oath of
Allegiance, congratulated him for scaling the “colossal hurdles” of the
appointment process as prescribed in the new ‘2014 Revised National
Judicial Council Guidelines and Procedural Rules of Appointment of
Judicial Officers of all Superior Courts of Record in Nigeria’.
Justice Mohammed described the system of appointment established by
the new guidelines as merit-based, adding that appointment of judges
would no longer be based on “fraternal connections” and nepotism.
He said, “The newly enacted guidelines bring the judiciary into an
era where the eligibility of a candidate for appointment to the bench
will no longer be based on nepotism, familial or fraternal connections.
“The guidelines provide a mechanism which would ensure that only
fit and proper persons and the most intellectually astute, morally
sound, meritorious and deserving candidates are appointed as Judges of
our courts. It is the best way to proceed in reforming our judiciary.”
Justice Mohammed also asked litigants and their lawyers to desist
from what he described as a worrisome trend, the practice of writing
petitions to the NJC against court decisions.
He reminded them that the NJC was not the proper venue for venting
dissatisfaction with decisions of courts, while also expressing the
resolve of the judiciary to continue to perform its statutory duties
with “the utmost fairness and justness.”
He said, “My lords, distinguished ladies and gentlemen, permit me
to digress slightly and use this opportunity to correct an impression
that has been formed in the minds of some Nigerians as to the role of
the National Judicial Council in our judiciary.
“Some litigants and their counsel no longer avail themselves of
appropriate judicial processes, but would rather write petition to the
Council.
“A most worrisome trend has begun to emerge where petitions are now
written to the NJC against even the decisions of the Supreme Court.
” A good example of this ill-advised conduct can be surmised from a
recent petition to the NJC by a fairly senior counsel against a
decision of a Panel of Justices of the Supreme Court, which heard a
pre-election appeal arising from the 2011 Governorship elections.
“The appeal was subsequently dismissed in March 2015 and the
dissatisfied appellant and his counsel sought relief with the NJC. I
must emphasise that the National Judicial Council is not a venue for
venting dissatisfaction with the decisions of our courts.
Post a Comment