However, The NIC had earlier on January 15 restrained the CCT from proceeding with the trial before adjourning till January 22 for the hearing of motion on notice.
At the report resumed sitting yesterday, the NIC renewed its restraining order against the CCT.
The reinforcement of the order followed an ex-parte application moved by the claimant’s counsel, James Igwe (SAN), who said there was difficulty in serving the CCT Chairman, Justice Danladi Umar, the court’s papers personally.
The only defendant at the hearing yesterday was the National Judicial Council (NJC) represented by Dr. Garba Tetengi (SAN).
However, the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has demanded an end to the trial of the CJN.
The lawyers’ union asked the federal government to discontinue the trial and “follow the rule of law.”
In its statement, the NBA argued that only through the Senate can the presidency remove Justice Onnoghen.
“Ahead of the scheduled resumption of proceedings at the CCT tomorrow (today), January 22, 2019, the NBA again calls on the executive branch of the Federal Government of Nigeria to discontinue forthwith the prosecution of the CJN, Justice Onnoghen, before the CCT, the NBA said in the statement signed by its President, Paul Usoro.
The NBA said it was obvious that President Muhammadu Buhari’s government is bent on removing Justice Onnoghen from office, but added that the presidency can only achieve the alleged objective, through the support of the Senate.
“Having become obvious that the immediate goal of the Executive is to remove the CJN from office, we urge the government to follow due process in attaining that goal.
“Due process is not followed when the executive branch of government files an
interlocutory motion before the CCT for the removal of the CJN.
“Such an application disparages, and assaults due process as enshrined in Section 292(1)(a)(i) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) (“the Constitution”).
“The said Section is very explicit on the due process for the CJN’s removal when it stipulates as follows: S.292(1)(a)(i) “A judicial officer shall not be removed from his office or appointment before his age of retirement except in the following circumstances
. . . in the case of . . . Chief Justice of Nigeria . . . by the President acting on an address supported by two-thirds majority of the Senate.”
According to the NBA, the law does not permit the current measures adopted by the government to remove the CJN.
It added that any attempt to remove Justice Onnoghen would imply that the CJN was treated order than a judicial officer.
“The Constitution leaves no room howsoever for the removal of the CJN from office, whether on a temporary or permanent basis, other than through the process afore-quoted. Being a country governed by laws, the FGN owes us a duty to comply strictly with these provisions of the constitution for the removal of the CJN.
“We, therefore, urge the executive branch of the federal government to please retrace its steps and discontinue the entire proceedings before the CCT forthwith and follow the constitutional procedure afore-stipulated.”
The NBA reiterated its call for the NJC to be briefed about the matter so that the judicial body executes the process for the discipline of the CJN.
“With respect to the trial of the CJN before the CCT on the assets’ declaration charge, the NBA stands by its Statement of January 22, 2019. Established judicial precedents dictate that the allegations must be referred to and handled by the NJC and it is only after the NJC’s pronouncement thereon against the CJN can the FGN prosecuting agencies proceed against him before any tribunal or court of law. For as long as the CJN remains a judicial officer, that process avails him and is mandatory of compliance by the FGN.
“Should the federal government, however, succeed in removing Justice Onnoghen as the CJN pursuant to the provisions of
Section 292(1)(a)(i) of the Constitution, there would be no need or requirement for the FGN to fulfill the NJC pre-condition ahead of his possible prosecution. With such a constitutional removal from office, Onnoghen would cease to be a judicial officer and the allegations against him would not need to be determined by the NJC ahead of any possible prosecution.”
The NBA added that the federal government has only two options in the matter.
“The choice is, therefore, that of FGN to make – either to pursue the removal of
the CJN pursuant to Section 292(1)(a)(i) of the Constitution or report the alleged assets declaration infraction to the NJC for its consideration as a pre-condition for the possible prosecution of the CJN. Whichever route the FGN chooses, the CCT proceedings must abate and be discontinued.
“It constitutes an assault on due process and undermines the rule of law. The sponsored media trial of the CJN must also cease. Amongst others, it criminally destroys the justice sector, subverts due process and completely erodes the rule of law. This desecration of the justice sector must stop now, please.”