Nigeria’s top judges in public spat over disputed benefits - CJ says it's 'dancing naked in the market place'

23 June 2022 · Carmel Rickard

Members of Nigeria’s apex court have come out strongly against the leader of the country’s judiciary, Tanko Muhammad. In the first letter of its kind, they have written to him, as Chief Justice of Nigeria to complain about a variety of issues related to conditions at court as well as conditions under which the judges operate. They moan about a memo informing them that electricity will operate at court only between 8 and 4 due to a diesel shortage, about amended court rules that have not been finalised, and about not being able to take ‘accompanying persons, due to age’ when they travel for training. The CJN in turn has responded with a statement that, by implication, criticises the judges for their initial letter, saying it amounted to ‘dancing naked in the market square’. In the letter he makes assurances, however, that everyone at court is getting on with their work and doing their normal duty.

In an unprecedented move, the entire complement of Nigeria’s supreme court has signed a protest letter sent to the country’s chief justice, Tanko Muhammad. The letter, leaked to the media, concerns a number of issues related to perks, internal court arrangements and related matters. It was answered a few days later by a formal statement issued by the CJ’s spokesperson, Ahuraka Isah.

Epileptic electricity

Among the complaints by the judges was the ‘epileptic electricity supply to the court’, the restoration of the justices’ monthly internet allowance and the failure to provide court accommodation for newly-appointed judges.

They also took issue with failure to provide ‘qualified legal assistants’ and wrote, ‘We are aware that even lower courts provide legal assistants’ for judges. ‘We require qualified legal assistants in order to offer our best. This demand has not been accorded any attention by the [CJ].’

They complained about the state of the court’s medical clinic. It had ‘become a mere consulting clinic,’ they moaned. ‘Drugs are not available to treat minor ailments. There is a general lack of concern for Justices who require immediate or emergency medical intervention.’

‘Reasons of age’

As to the rules of court, they were the ‘immediate tools employed by Justices to dispense justice to court users.’ Yet, they complained, ‘Your Lordship has kept the amended Rules of Court for almost three years now, awaiting your signature. We strongly believe the new rules will aid speedy dispensation of justice.’

The state of vehicles available for the judiciary to use was a cause of complaint, along with problems associated with ‘training’.

However, their complaint related to ‘training’ was rather unusual: the judges wanted the CJ to reinstate the system that operated ‘in the past’, when judges were nominated ‘to attend two to three foreign workshops and training per annum with an accompanying person for reasons of age.’

Privilege

However, since the present CJ had taken over, judges had attended only two workshops and ‘were not accorded the privilege of travelling with accompanying persons as was the practice.’

‘Your Lordship totally ignored this demand and yet travelled with your spouse, children and personal staff. We demand to know what has become of our training funds, have they been diverted, or is it a plain denial?’

Another hot issue concerned the fact that electricity is only being supplied to the court between 8am and 4pm because of a diesel shortage. The judges said the implication of this memo was that the justices had to finish their work and close before 4pm. It was clearly a question that had the court’s members exceedingly agitated.

Imminent danger

They wrote,

‘Your Lordship, this act alone portends imminent danger to the survival of this court and the judiciary as an institution, which is gradually drifting to extinction. The judiciary is an arm of government. … The implication of the memo is that this arm of government is potentially shut down. May God never allow that day.

‘Your Lordship, this is a wake up call. Your Lordship must take full responsibility as our leader. … We will not wait for the total collapse of the institution. We must not abandon our responsibility to call Your Lordship to order in the face of these sad developments that threaten our survival as an institution. We have done our utmost best to send a wake up call to Your Lordship. A stitch in time saves nine.

‘Finally, Your Lordship, the choice is now yours. It is either you quickly and swiftly take responsibility and address these burning issues or we will be compelled to further steps immediately. May this day never come.’

Dancing naked

The CJ moved quickly to assure the judges and the public that all was well with the court and that ‘everyone is going about his normal duty’.

His replying statement began: ‘Judges in all climes are to be seen and not heard, and that informed why the CJN refrained from joining issues until a letter, said to be personal, is spreading across the length and breadth of the society. This was akin to dancing naked at the market square by us with the ripple effect of the said letter.’

He explained that he had to ensure that money was spent for the purpose for which it was allocated. The ‘accusation’ from his colleague ‘is that more or all ought to have been done and not that nothing has been done; which is utopian in the contemporary condition of our country.’

‘No hostility’

There was no additional budget for the eight new judges appointed to the supreme court in 2020 and the apex court thus had to make do with the resources at its disposal.

He said two supreme court judges had died ‘within the period under consideration.’ ‘Both the four retirees and the two departed cost the court some funds in the forms of gratuities and allowances.’

‘The general public should be rest assured that there’s no hostility or adverse feelings amongst the justices of the supreme court, as everyone is going about his normal duty.’

Carmel Rickard

About the author

Recent articles by Carmel Rickard

‘No justification for the unjustifiable’: Lesotho’s ombud slams grand-scale torture, assault in Maseru prison

22 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Lesotho’s national ombud, Tlotliso Angelina Polaki, has issued a scathing report on massive-scale torture and assaults that took place in Maseru’s central correctional institution during December 2023, leaving about 95% of the inmates of the prison injured, one dead and one who is now wheelchair-bound and will never walk again.

Major court decision on image rights benefits Ugandan soccer players

21 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Members of Uganda’s national soccer team from the period around 2007/8 have just been awarded a payout against MTN Uganda by the commercial court. The telecom giant had a year-long contract with Proline, the players’ originating development soccer club, allowing it to use the players’ images for advertising. But MTN had continued to use their images even after that contract expired on the basis that it had a sponsorship agreement with Fufa, soccer’s governing body in Uganda. The players then challenged MTN in court, through Proline, and have now won a significant damages award. But the judgment exposed some serious flaws in the way that Fufa has approached the question of using the image rights of its senior players, and the court commented that this is a ‘case study’ for why Fufa needs to sort out its contractual arrangements with senior players.

Executive interference in Ugandan court decisions continues – this time by the justice minister

21 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Uganda’s minister of justice, Norbert Mao, has taken a leaf straight from the book of the country’s president, Yoweri Museveni. This week, the minister wrote to the principal judge of the Ugandan high court, asking that the judge directly intervene in a matter that has been brought to his attention by an MP on behalf of a constituent. Mao asked for the ‘immediate administrative intervention’ in the matter by the principal judge. Earlier this year, Museveni wrote a similar letter to the chief justice of Uganda, also requesting intervention in a matter, and the CJ later indicated that this was not the first time it had happened.

Is rape by family members treated too lightly by the law?

19 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

The high court has sent the case of a Malawian teenager, charged with raping his 89-year-old grandmother, back to the magistrate’s court for a possible re-trial because the court had wrongly prosecuted a case of rape instead of incest. If convicted in a re-trial, however, Malawi’s incest law could see the accused sentenced to a mere five years. Malawi’s penal code provides for a significant difference between the sentence to be imposed when a man rapes a close family member, and in a case where the two are not related. When they are unrelated, the code provides that a rape offender ‘shall be liable to be punished with death or with imprisonment for life’ (However, Malawi has had what amounts to a moratorium on carrying out the death penalty since 1992.) By contrast, ‘incest by males’, is categorised in the code as a ‘felony’, and anyone convicted ‘shall be liable for imprisonment for five years’. There is an exception: if it is proved ‘that the female person is under the age of 16, the offender shall be liable to imprisonment for life’.

Prominent SA advocates lose battle over conviction in Namibian courts for working without a permit, misleading immigration officials

Prominent SA advocates lose battle over conviction in Namibian courts for working without a permit, misleading immigration officials

6 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Two prominent South African advocates have just lost their last hope of squashing their convictions in the Namibian courts. Johannesburg advocates, Mike Hellens SC and Dawie Joubert SC, had been found guilty on two counts, first, working as legal practitioners without an employment permit, and second, giving false or misleading information to immigration officers when they entered the country in 2019. Though they had gone to Namibia to appear in court in a bail application, they told the immigration officials they were there for a ‘visit’ and for a ‘meeting’. Both appealed against their conviction but they had also asked for a judicial review of the decision. In the high court they lost their appeal but won on the review. The outcome in both matters were taken to the apex supreme court for a final word. In December 2023, they lost their appeal at the supreme court. What would that same court say when the state appealed against the review finding? The supreme court has now given its answer: it found the review, that had favoured Hellens and Joubert, was wrongly decided, and set it aside, awarding costs against the two advocates in both the high court and the supreme court.