C'River Judiciary: The Politics Of Denying Caesar What Is Caesar's And The Implications

C'River Judiciary: The Politics Of Denying Caesar What Is Caesar's And The Implications. 

~Archibong Edet

The appointment of a substantive Chief Judge of Cross River State has generated commentaries in many quarters and has portrayed Cross River State in bad light. An appointment with clear constitutional provisions on the procedures to follow ought to be done with equanimity.

It is worth stating unequivocally that the office of the Chief Judge of Cross River State is a sacred one and should never be subjected to political affiliations or partisanship. We must remind ourselves that this is not a secular election that calls for campaign and manifestos as seen on social media lately. The sanctity of the office of the CJ must be preserved and not whittled down by the shenanigans of desperate politicians. 

The ongoing drama in the Cross River State judiciary is not unprecedented. In a rather sad retrospect, the Rivers State Judiciary experienced the same dilemma from 20th August, 2013 up until the 31st May, 2015. In the unfortunate impasse, the former Governor, Rt. Hon. Chibuike Ameachi went against the recommendation of the National Judicial Council to appoint his preferred candidate Hon. Justice P. N. C. Agumagu. The said irregular and unconstitutional appointment of Hon. Justice P. N. C. Agumagu was met with stiff resistance by the National Judicial Council and the then Chief Justice of Nigeria, Hon. Justice Mahmud Mohammed. The former CJN in his first official reaction to the crisis in Rivers State Judiciary had blamed the former Governor of Rivers State, Chibuike Amaechi, for circumventing seniority and extant procedures in the appointment of a new Chief Judge for the State.

The Court of Appeal in Governor of Rivers State & ors v. National Judicial Council & anor (Unreported, Suit No CA/PH/412/2014) in its unanimous judgment delivered on December 23, 2015, held that the NJC is not bound to recommend the candidate preferred by the governor for the position of the state’s Chief Judge. The court further held that consideration of seniority in the appointment of a Chief Judge is constitutional and sacrosanct.

Contrary to the statement made by Rt. Hon. Eteng Williams, the Speaker of Cross River State House of Assembly and reported by Punch online on September 17, 2020, S.271 of the Constitution FRN 1999 (as Amended) is very explicit on the procedure for appointment. While it is the office of the Governor to appoint the Chief Judge of the State, it is the NJC that recommends names to the Governor and not the reverse. It should be further noted that by virtue of subsection (4) of the section supra, where such appointment by the Governor is not in consonance with the recommendation of the NJC, it shall cease to have effect after expiration of three months from the date of such appointment and the Governor shall not re-appoint a person whose appointment has lapsed save and except with the approval of the NJC for another three months. This therefore means that Hon. Justice Maurice Odey Eneji cannot be re-appointed as acting Chief Judge and anything to the contrary will amount to executive rascality. 

From the foregoing, it is evident that the Cross River State government is derailing in her duty to appoint a substantive Chief Judge of the State. The simple and constitutional thing to do in order to remedy the already ugly situation is to appoint the most senior judge as the substantive Chief Judge of Cross River State, which is the person of Hon. Justice Akon Ikpeme. 

In Rivers State, the NJC not only refused to recognize the unconstitutional appointment of Hon. Justice P.N.C. Agumagu as Chief Judge of Rivers State but also suspended him from performing the functions of his office as a judicial officer for accepting his purported appointment as Chief Judge of Rivers State without the prior recommendation of the NJC. As Ahuraka Isah, Media Aide to the former Chief Justice of Nigeria stated it, the suspension of Hon. Justice P. N. C. Agumagu was intended to preserve the authority of the National Judicial Council and “arrest or prevent judicial anarchy". 

The intendment of the constitution on the procedures for appointment is to guarantee fairness, impartiality and to ensure unanimity of the three arms of government in the appointment of the Chief Judge. The provisions are not in constitution to occupy space. The NJC is therefore encouraged to resist the attempt by the executive to muscle it in the discharge of its constitutional responsibility and to treat its recommendation with contempt. It should put to a stop the seeming rigmarole in the appointment of a substantive Chief Judge and view the undergoing anarchy in the Cross River State judiciary with suspicious eyes. If need be, it should replicate the spirited effort and sanctions Rivers State employed.