 |
| The Chief Justice of Nigeria Justice Mariam Aloma-Mukhtar. |
QUALIFICATION AND PROCEDURE FOR THE
APPOINTMENT AND REMOVAL OF JUDICIAL OFFICERS IN NIGERIA
QUALIFICATIONS
The post-call
qualification requirement for appointment as the Chief Justice of Nigeria or
Justice of the Supreme Court is a period not less than 15 years – section 231(3) of the 1999 Constitution of
the Federal Republic of Nigeria (CFRN)..
For the President of
the Federal Court of Appeal or Justice of the Federal Court of Appeal is a
period not less than 12 years – section
238(3) of the 1999 CFRN.
For the Chief Judge of
the Federal High Court, Chief Judges of States and Federal High Court Judges
and State High Court Judges is a period not less than 10 years – section 256(3) of the 1999 CFRN.
For the Grand Kadis of
the various Sharia Court of Appeal and other Kadis they need to have obtained a
recognised qualification in Islamic personal law from institution approved by
the State Judicial Service Commission and must have held such qualification for
a period not less than 10 years and he either has considerable experience in
the practice of Islamic personal law or he is a distinguished scholar of
Islamic personal law – section 276(3) of
the 1999 CFRN.
In the case of the
President of the Customary Court of Appeal and the judges of the customary
court of Appeal, they need apart from such other qualifications as may be
prescribed by the National Assembly considerable knowledge of and experience in
the practice of customary law for a period not less than 10 years – section 281(3) of the 1999 CFRN.
PROCEDURE FOR APPOINTMENT
At independence in
1960 the criteria for the appointment of a Judge either in the High Court of
the regions or the Federal Supreme Court was ten years post-call experience.
The appointing-body except for the Chief Justice of the Federation and, the
chief Justice of Lagos High Court and Regional Chief Justices was the Judicial
Service Commission (J. S. C) either of Federal or State region. Under the 1963
Constitution the Judicial Service Commissions were abolished. In its place we
had the President and the Governors acting on the advice of the Prime Minister
and Premiers respectively as the appointing bodies. A body similar in some
respects with the Judicial Service Commission was re-introduced by the Military
in the name of Advisory
Judicial Committee, this was
a welcomed gesture. The 1979 Constitution introduced some innovations. The
Chief Justice of the Federation was to be appointed by the President in his discretion
but this was subject to confirmation by simple majority in the Senate. Other
justices were appointed on the advice of the Federal Judicial Service
Commission subject to confirmation in the Senate. Same practice was followed in
the appointment of the President of the Federal Court of Appeal. In the case of
other Federal Court or-Appeal Justices and also the Chief Judge of the Federal High
Court and the other is judges of the Federal High Court there is no requirement
of approval by the Senate.
At the State level
apart from the Chief Justices of the various States, the Grand Kadis of the
Sharia Court of Appeal of the States where they exist and the President of the
Customary Court of Appeal in States where they also exist, whose appointments
require approval by the simple majority in the respective state Assemblies. The
other Judges, Kadis and Judges of the Customary Court of Appeal are appointed
on the recommendation of the respective State Judicial Service Commissions.
Recommendation
to the Head of the Executive Arm of Government, for either appointment or
removal from office of any Judicial Officer in both the Federal and the State
Judiciaries, constitutionally, shall come from the National Judicial Council.
Taking into
account the fact that the responsibility for a dependable Judiciary for the
country rests with the National Judicial Council, the Council was of the view
that it must design Guidelines to ensure that the Judicial Service Commissions
at both Federal and States, including the Judicial Service Committee, FCT,
Abuja, are directed and assisted in the manner they select candidates for
submission to NJC for recommendation of appointment. Most importantly, the
procedure will guarantee a uniform standard at all levels.
The Guidelines were designed to ensure
that:
1.
The selection process is transparent and
provides a level playing ground for free and fair selection for the best candidates
to emerge;
2.
The selection process guarantees independence of
Judicial Service Commissions, excludes lobbying by potential candidates or any
one on their behalf and prohibit imposition of any candidates on Judicial
Service Commissions as well as prohibit them from accepting imposition of
unsuitable candidates from any quarters; and
3.
decision of all those nominating and or
recommending candidates to National Judicial Council take fully into account
the necessity for the candidate to have high integrity and good reputation;
track record of intellectual capacity, competence, hard work and industry in
the legal profession; record of reasonable successful background in legal
practice as private legal practitioner or State Counsel or service in the Lower
Bench and commitment to justice and absence of likelihood of bias on the
grounds of tribe, ethnicity, religion, politics or gender.
Therefore the
following procedure, attached hereto, shall be complied with by the Federal and
State Judicial Service Commissions, as well as the Federal Capital Territory,
Judicial Service Committee, in their submission of nominated candidates to the
National Judicial Council for appointment to judicial office.
The procedure to be followed are:
1.
Letter of intention alongside the Governor’s
approval shall be forwarded to the Secretary of the Council;
2.
Minutes of the meeting of any Judicial Service
Commission or Committee for the nomination of candidates for appointment to
judicial office must be forwarded in 30 copies to the National Judicial Council
addressed to the Secretary of the National Judicial Council. This would enable
the National Judicial Council have the benefit of the full discussions and the
reasons that gave rise to the nomination, preference or rejection of the
candidates considered by the Commission;
3.
The Chief Judge must, as a first step, clear the
number of Judges to be appointed with the Governor before commencing the
processes of identification and screening;
4.
In making the nominations, the State High Court
Judges must be fully involved (by making individual nominations and attaching
same to the Chief Judge’s final nomination to avoid sharp practices) and must
take into consideration, as much as possible, professional expertise; seniority
at the Bar or the Bench; Federal character or geographical spread; consultation
where necessary without compromising the cherished independence of the
Judiciary or allowing politics to permeate or influence the appointment of
judicial officers; avoid recommending any person whose reputation in the
locality had been tarnished;
5.
Candidates whose names are forwarded must
undergo medical tests and attach evidence of same;
6.
Candidates’ Curricula Vitae must be attached
along with their Bio-data (NJC Form A);
7.
Each of the Candidates nominated shall submit
along with his/her Credentials, ten (10) Judgments, obtained or delivered in
contested cases in any given past two (2) years, which shall be confirmed by
the Head of Court/the Chief Judge;
8.
Candidates from the Bar are to submit their
Practicing fee receipts for Five (5) years;
9.
A security report from the State Security
Service; and
10. Comments
from the State Branch of the Nigerian Bar Association on the person(s) so
nominated.
The following should however be noted –
1.
The number of candidates nominated must be
doubled in case any of the first set of nominations being disqualified.
2.
On the issue of precedence, only the
Attorney-General (Federal or State) should take precedence over others to be
appointed and sworn-in on the same day.
3.
As much as possible, Governors should ensure
that essential facilities (such as cars, accommodation, etc); would be made
available to the Judges upon appointment.
4.
There should be no lobbying by candidates.
5.
That since not all the Chief Judges of the
States are members of the National Judicial Council, it would be necessary to
invite the Chief Judge of the State (if not a member) whose candidates would be
considered by the Council, to participate in the deliberation on such
nomination, whenever necessary;
THE GROUNDS AND PROCEDURE FOR DISCIPLINING JUDICIAL OFFICERS
The National Judicial Council (NJC) also in exercising the powers conferred on it by Paragraph 21 of the Third Schedule to the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, takes disciplinary actions ranging from warning, compulsory retirement and dismissal from office of erring Judicial Officers who are found guilty of judicial misconduct.
The rules guiding Judicial Officers is the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers for the Federal Republic of Nigeria. This shall be summarized below.
This Code, hereto forwarded, provides for a uniform, dignified and respectable mode of behaviour by Judicial Officers nationwide. It is divided into di fferent Rules which guide and shape the conduct of the Judicial Officers. Violation of the Rules, elicits disciplinary action, leading to removal from office of any defaulting Judicial Officer. Some of its main features are stated hereunder.
A Judicial Officer should live above reproach by ensuring that his conduct both in his official and unofficial capacity, utterances and social relationships, are not susceptible to any iota of doubt. In performing his duties, a Judicial Officer is expected to be courteous, fair and firm to all manner of people without fear or favour and also, avoid the abuse of power arising from issuing interim injunctions, ex parte. Furthermore, he should be alive to his official duties by complying with the provisions of the constitution regarding his responsibilities in court. A Judicial Officer should also endeavour to be punctual and sit regularly while avoiding unnecessary adjournments.
In performing his administrative duties, a Judicial Officer should maintain professional competence, observe high standards of fidelity and diligence and request his staff and other court officials to do same. He should not be a member of a tenders board or engage in the award of contracts and avoid any form of sexual harassment.
While in office, a Judicial Officer is prohibited from accepting chieftaincy titles and serving as the executor, administrator, trustee etc. of an estate unless for a family estate and where it would not interfere with his judicial duties.
While a Judicial Officer can accept personal gifts or benefit from relatives or personal friends on occasions as recognised by custom, books on complimentary basis or loan from a lending institution following due process, he is prohibited from accepting a gift or favour on account of the discharge of his official duties. Neither is he expected to practice law or act as an arbitrator.
Judicial Officers who flagrantly violated the provisions of this Code of Conduct, had been sanctioned and removed from office; such as Hon. Justice Egbo Egbo of Federal High Court, and Hon. Justice Stanley C. Nnaji of Enugu State High Court; to mention but a few.
REMOVAL OF JUDICIAL OFFICERS
A judicial officer shall be removed under section 292 of the 1999 CFRN if –
1. He is incapable of performing his duties;
2. He has attained retirement age; and
3. He is involved in any form of misconduct.
No comments:
Post a Comment