It is a new legal year and at a ceremony commemorating its
commencement, the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), the Hon Justice Walter Samuel
Onnoghen announced the establishment of new corruption courts to aid efforts of
the federal government in tackling the menace.
Fighting corruption has been the buzzword for the present
government at the centre led by President Muhammadu Buhari for the past 27 months.
The administration, to be fair to it, has unearthed mind-boggling instances of
corruption under the Goodluck Jonathan administration but is yet to establish
significant victories against the many corruption suspects identified.
At different points in time, the government has blamed its
uninspiring success rate in court either on the aggression of ‘corruption
fighting back’ or on the complicity of judges and other members of the legal
profession. The delays experienced in dispensing with corruption and other
criminal matters have also been cause for worry among Nigerians and in one
instance, President Buhari described the judiciary as his major headache in the
anti-corruption war.
The Nigerian judiciary has displayed varying reactions to
vitriolic comments by members of the executive arm of government, choosing many
times to ignore the attacks while issuing strong statements to assert its
innocence and fairness on some occasions. On Monday, 18th September, 2017, the
judiciary gave its most assertive response yet by announcing the establishment
of special corruption courts as a measure of support for ongoing efforts to
tackle corruption.
The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Hon Justice Walter Onnoghen
(JSC), while declaring open the new legal year stated that “We, in the
judiciary are fully aware and in fact worried by concerns expressed by members
of the public on the very slow speed with which corruption cases in particular
are being heard or determined by our courts.”
Under the new arrangement announced by the CJN, all divisions of
state and federal high courts in Nigeria are to have special departments to
which corruption matters will be duly assigned to ensure that more corruption
cases are heard and dispensed with in timely fashion. All appeals emanating
from corruption cases are also to be treated with dispatch by the Court of
Appeal and the Supreme Court. In addition, the judiciary will be establishing
an Anti-Corruption Cases Trial Monitoring Committee to ensure that all trial
and appellate courts handle corruption cases with required diligence and
transparency.
All the new measures considered highlight the importance of the
judiciary to government’s anti-corruption campaign and appear to score a major
point against the president and his men who have in any case been unable to
establish similar measures through legislation. The executive bill for the
establishment of special courts for corruption and other crimes has earned an
indeterminate fate in the National Assembly for predictable reasons while the
prosecution advisory committees supervised by the attorney-general of the
federation have become known more for media wars with anti-graft agencies than
for unique stratagems of clinching victory for the government in court.
The above said, while the new measures announced by the CJN hint
at major reforms within the judiciary, we cannot pretend not to know that they
may also simply represent face-saving measures. Our judges are far from
blameless as far as corruption is concerned and like all other systems operated
by humans, individual shortcomings may as well render nought the expected
effects of new reforms. To mitigate the possibilities of misapplied use of
discretion in facilitating speedy handling of corruption cases, the CJN needs
to issue unified and extensive practice directions guiding the activities of
the special corruption courts to be set up in various divisions.
In the last one year, we have seen raids carried out by the
Department of State Services (DSS) and the Economic and Financial Crimes
Commission (EFCC) on the homes of certain judges and even though revelations by
the agencies do not constitute conclusive proof of wrongdoing, they hint at
distressing possibilities. It is not impossible that there are many more
questionable persons still sitting as judges at various levels of court and who
may make it into new panels set up to hear corruption cases. It will therefore
be necessary for the National Judicial Council (NJC) to work with relevant
agencies and stakeholders in minimising this risk by designing a thorough
screening process for the selection of judges to hear corruption cases.
Going beyond the establishment of special courts and procedures to
treat corruption cases, the CJN needs to work with the executive and
legislative arms of government for extensive reforms of the judiciary to
generally ensure the faster dispensation of justice in all matters. Nigeria
needs more courtrooms and many more judicial officers with enhanced skills and
aided by technology to ensure increased access to court verdicts in timely
fashion as obtains in the fastest developing countries. The recent ruling of
the Kenyan Supreme Court nullifying the re-election of President Uhuru Kenyatta
was, for instance, available to the public within two hours of the verdict. The
same can happen in Nigeria, we just need to push a little harder and that of
course would also mean addressing the inefficiencies and brazen corrupt
tendencies of support staff in many of our courts.
Source; www.olisa.tv
No comments: