Until today their planned arraignment was billed before an independent body a special court of some sort as being canvassed by a section of members of the wig and gown. But this view may have gone to the dustbin of history. Reason:
The Federal Government will this morning commence a process that would establish a case of graft against seven judges including two Supreme Court Justices who were accused of bribery and corruption before an Abuja High Court.
Justices Inyang Okoro, Sylvester Ngwuta, Adeniyi Ademola, Kabir Auta, Mu’azu Pindiga, Mohammed Tsamiya and the Chief Judge of Enugu, I. A. Umezulike were between October 7 and 8 picked up in their homes by the Department of State Services (DSS) in a sting operation on alleged graft. Already, the Federal Government has initiated criminal proceedings against two of the judges.
They are Justices Ngwuta and Ademola. For instance, Justice Ngwuta is facing criminal prosecution on charges of money laundering and other offences bordering on violation of Immigration Act.
His charges include Money Laundering, contrary to Section 15 (2) (d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2012 (as amended) and punishable under Section 15 (3) of the same Act.
It reads: “Sylvester Nwali Ngwuta, adult, ’M’, 65 years, of No. 2 Yellow Houses, Supreme Court Quarters, Off Shehu Shagari Way, Central District,Abuja, on or about the 4th day of January 2016, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, transferred the total sum of One Hundred and Thirty Million denominated in, Naira and US Dollars, (N130,000,000.00) to Nwamba Linus Chukwuebuka, a Building Contractor, which sums formed part of the proceeds of an unlawful act and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 15 (2) (d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2012 (as amended)”.
Specifically, Justice Ngwuta allegedly on October 8 retained in his possession three hundred and nineteen thousand, five hundred and ninety- six United States of America ($319,596.00) Dollars which was ‘part of the proceeds of an unlawful act and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 15 (2) (d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2012 (as amended).’
Besides, he allegedly retained in his possession twenty-five thousand nine hundred and fifteen Pounds Sterling (GBP 25,915) which ‘sum form part of the proceeds of an unlawful act and you thereby committed an offence contrary Section15 (2) (d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2012 (as amended). Count 8 reads an unauthorized possession of more than one Valid Diplomatic Passport contrary to Section 10 (1) (a) and 10 (2) of the Immigration Act 2015 and punishable under Section 10 (1) of the Act.
Justice Ngwuta in Count 9 was accused of making a false statement for the purpose of procuring a passport contrary to Section 10 (1) (c) of the Immigration Act 2015 and punishable under Section 10 (1) of the Act.
In count 10, he allegedly submitted ‘multiple applications to the Passport Office with the intention of obtaining multiple Diplomatic Passports for yourself and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 10 (1) (d) of the Immigration Act 2015 and punishable under Section 10 (1) of the same Act.’
Justice Ademola’s particulars of offence were different as he was charged alongside his wife, Toluwalope. In the charge, the couple according the federal government allegedly conspired to receive gratification contrary to Section 26(1) (c) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000 and punishable under Section 26 (1) of the same Law.
The charges read: “Adeniyi Francis Adetokunbo Ademola ‘m’ and Olabowale Toluwatope Ademola ‘F’ between 11th and 26th March 2015, in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable court, conspired to receive from Messrs Joe Agi and Associates through a bank account number 201/ 110160/1/1/0 domiciled at GTBank Plc., the total sum of thirty million naira, (NGN 30,000,000.00) and thereby com-mitted an offence contrary to Section 26(1)(c) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000 and punishable under section 26 (1) of the same Law”.
Also, in the charge, Justice Ademola allegedly received gratification contrary to Section 8(1)(a) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000 and punishable under Section 8(1) (a) (ii) of the same Law.
He allegedly on May 6, in his capacity as a Public Servant, corruptly received from the Law Firm of Messrs Johnson & Johnson Solicitors, $520, 000. 00 (Five Hundred and Twenty Thousand United State Dollars as gratification in the exercise of his official functions as a judge of the Federal High Court of Nigeria and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 8(1)(a) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act 2000.
Besides, Justice Ademola allegedly ‘between the 25th day of February 2015 and the 16th day of April 2015 in his capacity as a Public Servant, accepted from the Law Firm of Messrs Oshodi, Oshodi & Co, the sum of Six Million Naira (NGN 6,000,000.00) as gratification in the exercise of his official functions as a judge of the Federal High Court of Nigeria and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 8(1) (a) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000.
Although, the charge had been amended, the embattled Justice Ademola allegedly ‘between 5th January and 23rd June 2016 in his capacity as a Public Servant, corruptly received from the Law Firm of Messrs G.T.J Ademola & Co, the sum of Fifty Five Million, Six Hundred and Fifty Thousand Naira (NGN 55,650,000. 00) as gratification, in the exercise of his official functions as a judge of the Federal High Court of Nigeria and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 8(1)(a) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000.’
But the judge had described the charge against him as bogus and trumped up. One that would not stand the judicial test of time. Although Justice Ademola said he was ready to defend himself and clear his good name of any ambiguity, a member of his legal team, Mr. Jeph Njikonye said the judge would prove to the government and his traducers that a 15 count charge in a suit marked FCT/ CR/21/2016 initiated against him and his wife was not only bogus but not sustainable.
Njikonye opined that the prosecutors went so low to impugn that the judge received gratification from his uncle’s law firm, G.T.J Ademola & Co as mentioned in the charge saying it was obvious that the federal government only filed the charges to play to the gallery and justify the unconstitutional raid of the judges’ houses and their arrest by the Department of State Services.
Today, one of the seven judges and Justice of the Supreme Court, Ngwuta barring any hitch may be docked by the federal government. His trial which has already been assigned to his junior in hierarchy, Justice John Tsoho may be the beginning of his journey to prison in case the judge grants stringent conditions for his bail. He is not in custody though.
The trial of these judges is the first in Nigeria’s history as all eyes including major stakeholders in justice administration are divided on its implication on the scale of justice.
While some senior lawyers believe the planned trial of the judges would have negative implications on the third arm of government as its officers may become timid in the discharge of their sacred duties especially in cases involving government, others insisted that it will restore the golden years of the judiciary.
A former Lagos Solicitor-General and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr. Lawal Pedro, Chief Adeniyi Akintola, SAN, Norrison Quakers, SAN and a former vice-president of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Mr. Adekunle Ojo expressed disquiet over today’s arraignment of the Supreme Court Justices and others whose charges had been filed before an Abuja High Court.
Although they all admitted that it was indeed a trying period for the third arm of government, they chorused that the judiciary would come out stronger in regardless of ‘its trial’.
While expressing his view on the implications of their judges, Pedro brushed aside any negative implication the arraignment of the Supreme Court justice would have on the judiciary.
To him, their arraignment for the alleged corruption charges was not different from other criminal proceedings in court as the laws applied on ordinary Nigerians accused of theft or any criminal offence would also be made applicable to the ‘honourable’ judges. No one is above the law, Pedro enthused.
He went on: “Well, as far as I am concerned, it’s like every other arraignment and don’t forget that they are still presumed innocent until the contrary is proved.
These are mere allegations and that is why these judges must have their days in court. “It would not be fair to actually sweep the issue under the carpet without their arraignment.
If it happens like that, it will have an adverse effect on the judiciary and the country. “But the judges must also be given opportunity to defend themselves.
So, as far as I am concerned, it is only when the allegations were swept under the carpet that it could have a damaging effect on the judiciary and the country.
Akintola blamed the judiciary highest body—the National Judicial Council (NJC) for the travails bedeviling the judiciary. Besides, the Senior Advocate picked holes in the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s (EFCC) approach to the trial of the accused judges, describing it as bizarre.
He said: “I think we have been hearing about the judges’ arraignment for quite a while now. Let the EFCC arraign them if it wants to and spare us all these suspense.
I will not speculate on whether or not these judges will be arraigned because the National Judicial Council (NJC) has lost focus; it has been taken one step forward and several steps backward, even the EFCC’s approach to the issue are faulty; the commission has been dancing forward and backward.
Akintola was echoed by another Senior Advocate, who also heaped blames on the NJC. To Quakers, NJC ought to have conducted a thorough investigation of the alleged offences against the judges before asking them to step down in the first place. Quakers said: “First and foremost, the National Judicial Council (NJC) has not played its part as expected.
If you must deal with judges, the first part is for the NJC to play its role by either recommending them for compulsory retirement or dismissal as this will open them up for investigation and possibly trial if they are found culpable. That is Constitutional democracy.
What we currently practice in Nigeria is not Constitutional democracy. Ex-NBA vice-president Ojo lamented the rot in the judiciary, urging all hands to be on deck to clean up the system.
He said: “It is unfortunate that we have got to this level. This also signifies that we have largely failed as a people to examine ourselves when it is necessary for us to do so because what ought to be done was not done; an outsider has brought itself in to look into the issue.
“As it were, I am one of those who believe that no one is above the law. Even for a sitting president or governor, his immunity is but for a while. Judicial officers are only covered by immunity while they are carrying out their functions either as a judge or magistrate in line with the ethics of the profession.
“The arraignment of the judges will be an eye opener and it should help in cleaning the rot in the judiciary. Judges’ arraignment should serve as a vessel for cleaning up the rot in the judiciary.”
By: Foluso Ogunmodede
The Telegraph News
