CJN, Kekere-Ekun
The National Judicial Council, NJC has in wielded the big stick on the Imo judiciary, sacking 10 judges of the Imo State Judiciary Service, including the Chief Judge, Theophilus Nnamdi Nzeukwu
The sledgehammer was slammed on Nzeukwu for accepting to be sworn in as the Chief Judge of the state, being fully aware that he was not the most senior judge in the state, as prescribed by law.
He was the fourth in ranking in the state.
The nine other judges, were sacked for falsifying their dates of birth in their official records in order to stretch their times on the bench, a development, the council found reprehensible and unacceptable in the judicial system.
Spokesman of the NJC, Kemi Babalola Ogedengbe who conveyed the decision of the council in a statement, said the age falsifications, were carried out by the nine judges in order to confer on themselves the undue advantage of staying longer in service.
The statement said that the removal of the CJ, was consistent with Section 271 of the constitution, quoting the body for the appointment, promotion and discipline of judges, headed by Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, the Chief Justice of the Federation.
Governor Hope Uzodimma of Imo State was ordered by the CJ to appoint the most senior judge among the remaining judges to take over as the state’s CJ.
The nine judges, comprising of five from the High Court and four from the Customary Court of Appeal to include: M. E. Nwagboso, B. C. Theka, K. A. Leaweanya, Okereke Chinyere Ngozi and Innocent Chidi Ibeawuchi, all of the High Court.
The four others were Tennyson Nze, Ofoha Uchenna, Everyman Eleanya, and Rosemond Ibe from the Customary Court of Appeal.
Justice V. U. Okorie, who chaired the Commission that nominated as acting Chief Judge was however absolved, having dissented on record against the recommendation to appoint him to the position.
The statement, said: “Council took the decision after consideration of the reports of its Investigation Committee on allegations of age falsification against eighteen (18) Judges of the Imo state judiciary on the one hand and the queries issued to Hon. Justices V. U. Okorie and T. N. Nzeukwu.
The Council, however, dismissed for want of merit, similar allegations against three Judges of the State High Court whose dates of birth were found to bear no discrepancy.
“Six High Court Judges of the State, whose dates of birth either had discrepancies but with acceptable explanations or with discrepancies arising from genuine correction of their dates of birth to their disadvantage, were also exonerated.
The Judges whose dates of birth were found to bear no discrepancy, were named as I O. Agugua, C. A. Ononeze-Madu, L. C. Azuama all of the High Court, while the two others given a clean bill of health owing to provision of acceptable explanation for discrepancies in their dates of birth, included Vincent I. Onyeka and Vivian O. B. Ekezie, also of the High Court.
The statement, which said that the council directed that Onyeka and Ekezie must maintain the dates of birth supplied by the Council of Legal Education in their official records, named the four other absolved on account that they genuinely corrected their dates of birth to their disadvantage as P. U. Nodum, Alma Ngozi Eluwa, Matthew Chinedu Ijezie and Ononogbo Chidi Linus , all of the High Court.
The statement said, “Council, in further deliberation, barred a judge of the National Industrial Court, Hon. Justice Isaac J. Essien, from being considered for promotion to a Higher Court for three years due to misconduct. Council found that Hon. Justice Essien wrongly ordered the confiscation of over N1 billion belonging to the Nasarawa State Government and its Local Government Councils, despite being aware that there was a pending appeal and a pending application for stay of execution.
“Council also noted that he refused to step aside from the case after the Nasarawa State Government raised concerns about possible bias.
“Hon. Justice Essien was a former staff member of the State University, which owed him gratuity, and he had earlier demanded payment using the official letterhead of the Court – a clear breach of Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers.
“Council further criticized him for personally visiting the Court of Appeal registry to confirm if an appeal had been filed in the case — an action considered highly inappropriate for a Judge.
“His Lordship was found to have violated several rules in the Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers and was reprimanded and barred from elevation to a higher judicial office for a period of three years.
“Council also considered the reports of its Preliminary Complaints Assessment Committees, which contained a total number of 30 petitions against various Judicial Officers. Four Committees were empanelled for further investigation, four Judges were cautioned, while two petitions were dismissed for lacking in merit.
“Council cautioned Hon. Justice Rahman A. Oshodi, over misuse of judicial discretion in Suit No. ID/232/53C/23.
Hon. Justice Daniel Okungbowa, Chief Judge Edo State was also cautioned over abuse of his judicial discretion in Suit No.
B1/555/2020 and was advised to exercise his discretion judicially and judiciously in future.
“Council issued a final warning to Hon. Justice G. B. Okolosi of the Delta State High Court for continued flouting Section 294 (1) of the 1999 Constitution and Hon. Justice Sa’adatu .I Mark, Federal High Court received caution for delivering judgment after the constitutional 90 days.”
Regarding the petition against M. A. Ikpambese, Chief Judge of Benue State, the council threw it out, saying its probe on the report of the investigation Committee in respect of three petitions by the state Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Fidelis Bemsen Mnyim, Guana Benjamin Joseph, and Terhemen Ngbea against Ikpambese, showed he had no case to answer.
Absolving him of any judicial wrongdoing, it noted that all the petitions presented against him were with the sole aim to remove him from his position, adding that it was in fact particularly concerned about the role of Mnyim, in the scheme to remove the CJ and resolved to report him to the Legal Practitioners’ Disciplinary Council.
