‘It is unfitting for a docked judge to be recalled’

Judicial officers who were indicted and suspended from office were recently recalled on the ground that there are no charges preferred against them since their suspension or have been exonerated by the court, without a valid appeal against their acquittal. Immediately that was done, the federal government revived the prosecution process and filed charges against some of them. A Lagos-based lawyer, Mr. Johnson Esezoobo said such judges are unfit to continue to sit in judgment against follow citizens. He also bares his mind on the delay in the administration of justice at the appellate courts as well as the need to decentralize the Supreme Court among other issues in this interview Yetunde Ayobami Ojo.

What is your view about the recall of judges indicted by the security agencies?
A Judge is not an ordinary civil servant but a special civil servant. The law has established this fact. This difference is even seen in the conditions of service, which allow them serve up to 65 and 70 years for the higher courts and yet earn full salary till death. But greed and covetousness would not allow some Judges respect themselves. Some still get into the madness of acquisition of wealth like the ordinary civil servants do. So, they bring themselves low. I think it is unfitting for a Judge who has brought himself so low as to be taken into the dock to be recalled to sit in the temple of justice to judge decent human beings. Public perception would not allow the confidence that is required of the judiciary to do that.

I am aware of a Chief Judge who in collaboration with some of his Judges trades with justice by kidnapping justice and holding it hostage. He asks politicians to “go and bring commercial papers”. In one case, when the politician quipped what is commercial paper? The Chief Judge said “You mean you don’t know the meaning of commercial papers? Go and bring dollars”! So, when you break into the house of such a Judge who expects you to be looking for “Ghana must go” and you find “Commercial papers”, he should be made to explain the source of these “Commercial papers”.

Would you say the notion of presumption of innocence is exculpatory?
Of course, this is a strong element in the administration of criminal justice in Nigeria. But it is not meant to shield crime at any level. The notion is not exclusive of presumptions against the accused from available facts. If Esezoobo who as a lawyer could hardly fuel his Tokunbo car or pay his rent, even change his shoes is now as a Judge who is paid salary in Naira, throwing “commercial papers” around, building estates here and there and riding bullet proof cars, forgetting where he is coming from and perhaps, where he desires to go, heaven, the law should presume him to be dealing unprofessionally and as such should not be treated any better than a common criminal. He is no more deserving of that honour and prestige that once placed him above the common man in society because he has failed to respect himself.

Would you say justice is under siege?
We can no longer pretend that from the level of corruption in Nigeria, where some Judges now dispense justice for “commercial papers”, justice is not under siege, held hostage and dispensed to the highest bidder. That is why a Minister can visit a Justice of the Supreme Court or invite him to his house at night to negotiate Justice. And the CJN cannot get the President to caution his Ministers and explain what they were really after? It is amazing that the CJN would rather flex muscles by calling back the Judges in such untoward behaviour. At our age and level, after 60 years, going to 70, we should be more concerned about the legacy we want to bequeath to coming generation than the bread and butter from the practice of law.

What then is the panacea?
By the current structural arrangement, the Judge is very powerful because he is the Judge of both the facts and the law. And the Supreme Court says he has the right to be wrong. So, if he decides to close his eye to the facts and the law, his conclusion on both law and the facts is final. Under this system, it is not difficult for a Judge to discharge an accused person with a stroke of the pen and heap the blame on the prosecutorial team. I would therefore, suggest the institution of the Jury System, which makes the Judges to sit with a Jury on certain matters. The Jury will advise the Judge on the facts to which he can now apply the law. This will make it difficult for a Judge to close his eyes to the facts as is currently done.

As a lawyer are you satisfied with the standard of legal practice in Nigeria?
Legal practice has two parts; you have the lawyers, you have the Judges. They both come to legal practice and the judicial process. I will say I am not satisfied with it. The level of practice is permissive of oppression and all manner of injustice particularly when the State is involved. There is too much contempt for law by the authorities and people in high places. State legal officers are simply trading, operating from the position of power. The standard of administration of justice under the two levels is not satisfactory. A System that permits citizens accused of criminal offence to go to court to restrain Police, EFCC and others from inviting arresting, investigating and charging them to court is strange.

What is your take on the delay in the administration of justice at the appellate Courts?
The system is also permissive of oppression and injustice occasioned by delay in our appellate courts. I still believe that with proper management, there is no reason why a case should take more than two years after exchange of briefs by the parties. The briefs system was adopted to remove incidents of delay. If under the system we still spend as long as six years in the appellate courts then the problem must be with the management. One result of this delay is that judgments cannot be enforced. It makes going to court useless.

What is your assessment of the Court of Appeal in terms of improvement and would you support the decentralisation of the Supreme Court?
Let me quickly add that the Court of Appeal Lagos division has greatly improved. The Supreme Court needs to examine itself and adjust. This is the last court in the land. It should not allow litigants to be frustrated by keeping them in court longer than necessary. Six years in the court of last resort is alarming. Let us decentralise the Supreme Court into three Divisions to solve the problem.

In your view, would you say it’s proper for top public officers standing trial to remain in office during trial?
This is one absurd aspect of our law. How can a law that permits legislators, Governors and ex-Governors standing trial for terrorism, corruption and yet keeping their offices under the notion of presumption of innocence be expected to produce a good and responsible society? In a decent society, there would be legislative intervention that will bar such accused persons from office until they have had their trials. Such legislative intervention could be inspired by strong judicial activism. And the implements of judicial activism to effectuate change are right within the constitution such as S.36 (5) of the Constitution that permits a law that “imposes upon any person the burden of proving particular facts”. Another tool is the fundamental objectives & Directive principles of ‘State Policy’ clause under Chapter III of the constitution particularly Section 13. Lack of judicial activism has rendered those provisions of the Constitution dormant. A third tool is the public interest element. Section 15(5) of the Constitution enacts that the “The State shall abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power”. If a public officer accused of corrupt practice and abuse of power is allowed to remain in office on the notion of presumption of innocence that will be encouraging the vice.

What is your take on the National Judicial Council?
There is need for amendment of the Constitution to restructure the National Judicial Council. There are some persons there on the Council who are not supposed to be there but are there by reason of being the heads of their departments. These persons compromise justice and are very corrupt.

What is your assessment of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria?
The court has undergone great transformation. The President, Justice Babatunde Adejumo deserves commendation for taking the court to its current enviable height. However, no sooner had he taken it this far than he transmuted into an Emperor, doing whatever he likes there. So, discipline has broken down there. For example, before the transformation, as one of the patrons of the cour, I know that Judges and support staff were regularly sent on training and conferences. But I cannot recall when last I heard the President talk about Judges going on training or conference since the transformation. Early this year, I learnt that the Judges were just thrust with new rules of court the same way we lawyers were. It never used to be like that. Only in an imperial setting does this happen; that Judges would not have impute to formulation of rules of Court that they are to apply in the administration of justice.

What would you say is your regrets and desire as a lawyer?
I regret that notwithstanding that Nigeria is governed by law, yet, we do not observe our national ethics or the ideal of our constitution. It takes the strength of character for anybody to retain integrity. That is one lesson from the travail of the Judges and some lawyers whose home is now in the dock. But notwithstanding the situation of our time, it is still better to strive to keep integrity so that on the day of reckoning, we can like King David in Psalm 25:21 say “Let integrity and uprightness preserve me”. As for my desire, this flows from my experiences. I was removed from office in 1990 because I would not compromise. In 1991 and in 1998 respectively, one of the Directors and the Managing Director came to my office to retain my services. Their comment on the different occasions was “Johnson, you never change”. So my prayer is that even today in 2017, may God help me to remain firm for what is right and never compromise. A man should be known to stand for what is right.