Tag: Tanko Mohammed

Categories
NEWS & LIFE

I didn’t blame judiciary for high-profile cases delay – Malami

Malami responds to critics over swearing-in of APC Chairman
Abubakar-Malami

A day after the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Tanko Moahhamed, tackled Justice Minister Abubakar Malami, SAN, over his comment that the judiciary is responsible for the delays that high-profile ases suffer, he has said that that was not his position.

He says he didn’t blame the judiciary for delays in prosecution of the high profile cases.
Malami made this known in a statement by Dr Umar Gwandu, his Special Assistant on Media and Public Relations in Abuja on Wednesday.

Malami was reacting to the press statement by the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), which in turn was a reaction to suggestions that the Judiciary was responsible for delays in prosecution of high profile cases.
Malami said the President Muhammadu Buhari-led Government accords respect to the democratic provisions of the doctrine of separation of powers among the three independent and separate arms of government.

The minister noted with dismay the way his response to a question in a recent interview was construed to evoke an unintended and non-existing inferences which some mischief makers projected him as blaming the judiciary.
“It was an innocent statement aimed at showing and re-enactment of tripartite division of powers and responsibilities among the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary,” he said.

Malami said the Federal Government maintained the sanctity of the provisions of sections 4, 5 and 6 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria that delineate the roles and responsibilities of the executives, legislature and judiciary.
“It is on this note that the Federal Government supported the review of Section 121(3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to accommodate the provisions for financial autonomy of the state legislature and judiciary.

“In addition to the Constitutional provisions, the Federal Government also came up with the Executive Order 10 to enforce the provision of autonomy of State Legislature and Judiciary.
“It is on the record that the Buhari-led Federal Government has a record of non-interference with or meddling into the affairs of the legislature and judiciary”.

He said that it was within the context of the quality and feature of non-interference by the Buhari-led Federal government and for the avoidance of sub-judice that he responded that high-profile cases were presented by the Federal Government for prosecution and the government came out with initiatives in its efforts to support speedy determination of justice.
“This position was in consistent with the decision of the Court of Appeal in Hon. Abdullahi Maccido Ahmad v. Sokoto State House of Assembly & Anor, (2002) 44 WRN 52 where the Court Per Salami JCA held inter alia that;
“The doctrine of separation of powers has three implications: that the same person should not be part of more than one of the arms or division of governmen.

“That one branch should not dominate or control another arm. This is particularly important in the relationship between (the) executive and the courts;
“That one branch should not attempt to exercise the function of the other…”
The Minister said in view of the crucial role of the judiciary as an essential element of democratic system, the Federal Government gives attention to the budgetary provisions of the Judiciary in addition to welfare-packages meant to enhance their operations.

Categories
NEWS & LIFE POLITICS

CJN tackles Malami over claim that judiciary delays high-profile cases

BREAKING: CJN tests positive for COVID-19
CJN Tanko Muhamamd

The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Justice Tanko Muhammad has reacted to a claim by the Justice Minister and Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, that judiciary is responsible for delays in high-profile cases.

According to him, the judiciary cannot be blamed for such, citing issues on the part of government prosecution and budgets.

The CJN’s position is contained in a statement issued by his Senior Special Assistant on Media on Monday in Abuja.
He said the position of the Minister of Justice and the Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami (SAN) that the Judiciary be held responsible for delays in the trial and delivery of judgments in corruption cases involving politically exposed individuals appears to be one-sided.

“The Nigerian Judiciary is not here to lay claims to being perfect but when the political and economic conditions under which it is operating is compared with its counterparts in other climes, it would be adjudged a prize model.
“The Judiciary by its constitutional position does not have a criminal investigations unit or Fraud Detective Squad to detect and investigate criminal involvement of any person, neither does it have a garrison command to fight its cause or enforce its orders and decisions.

“More often than not, the Federal Government’s prosecution sector files more charges than it can prove or provide witnesses, at times as a result the prosecution even fails”.
He said that the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (2015) under reference is infected with sores in some parts, making speeding adjudications impossible in some instances.
“In some instances the high volume of cases, limited number of judges, poor infrastructure or archaic equipment also contribute to the challenges.”

He noted that the federal government had while giving reasons for its under-funding of the Judiciary, on January 26, at the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Justice Sector Summit 2022 in Abuja said that the Judiciary has not been transparent in the spending its yearly allocations.
“The Judiciary has refrained from joining issues all this while but to state the facts in line with the budget call circular and ceiling the Federal Government sent to the Judiciary before the beginning of the fiscal year.
”The, Judiciary prepares its budget estimates for capital, overhead and personnel costs according to the ceiling, needs and priority.

“The Judiciary defends its budget before the Senate and House of Representatives Committees on Judiciary at the National Assembly, besides the initial vetting by the Executive.
“It also has an internal mechanism for budget control and implementation. Each Court and judicial body has a budget unit, the accounts department, internal audit, Due Process Unit, as well as Departmental Tenders Board.
“There is also a Due Process Committee at the NJC and the Judicial Tenders Board that award contracts on expenditure above the approval limit of the accounting officers of the Courts and judicial bodies”, he added.
He said the layers of control were established by the Judiciary to ensure transparency, accountability and effective budget implementation.

“Similarly, by virtue of Sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution, the National Assembly carries out oversight visits to the Judiciary to monitor the implementation of its budget.
“Section 88(2)(b) also mandates the National Assembly to expose corruption, inefficiency or waste in the execution or administration of laws within its legislative competence and in the disbursement or administration of funds appropriated by it.

“The Executive also put in place some mechanism to monitor budget implementation and accountability in the Judiciary through its organs like the office of Accountant General of the Federation and Auditor General of the Federation, and other agencies where the need arises”.
According to him, apart from the internal audit units of the Judiciary, the Federal Audit Department maintains offices in all the courts and judicial bodies that monitor spending in the Judiciary.
“If the Federal Audit raises a query on any transaction and it is not well defended, it sends the report to the Public Accounts Committees of the National Assembly and officials of the Judiciary would be invited to explain themselves.

“The question to ask is, who else should the Judiciary open its account books to, and who among these organs had raised exceptions which were not defended by the Third Arm?
The answer is none.
“One only hopes that these allegations against the Judiciary by the Federal Government is not just a way of giving a dog a bad name so as to hang it”, he concluded.

Categories
HEADLINES NEWS & LIFE POLITICS

Senate set to screen Tanko Mohammed for CJN

CJN pleads with JUSUN to call off strike
CJN

The Senate,agreed to screen Justice Tanko Mohammed for the position of Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), on Wednesday.

The President of the Senate, Dr Ahmad Lawan, disclosed this at the plenary on Tuesday.
Lawan said Tanko would appear before the Committee of the Whole of the Senate to commence his screening exercise.
He said copies of the nominee’s Curriculum Vitae (CV) had been distributed to the lawmakers to enable them have adequate background information about him and his career.
He urged his colleagues to take time to go through the copies before Wednesday so as to direct relevant questions to him.
The Senate Leader, Sen. Yahaya Abubakar (APC-Kebbi), had earlier made reference to the letter of request for Tanko’s confirmation as substantive Chief Justice of Nigeria.
Abubakar said the president’s request was in accordance with Section 231 (1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as Amended.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) recalls that the President of the Senate on July 11, read Buhari’s letter at the plenary.

President Muhammadu Buhari swore in Tanko Mohammed as the acting CJN in January 2019 following the suspension and later sack of former CJN, Walter Onnoghen.

Categories
HEADLINES NEWS & LIFE POLITICS

Buhari seeks Senate’s confirmation of Justice Tanko Mohammed as CJN

CJN pleads with JUSUN to call off strike
CJN

President Mohammadu Buhari has sent a letter requesting the Senate to confirm the appointment of Tanko Mohammed as the substantive Chief Justice of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

The President of the Senate, Dr Ahmad Lawan read the letter from Buhari at the plenary on Thursday.

The letter addressed Lawan, sought the cooperation of the Senate for the confirmation in line with Section 231 (1) of the 1999 Constitution as amended.

It also made reference to the section of the constitution which empowers the National Judicial Council (NJC) to have made such recommendations.

Dr Lawan also read another letter from the President which such expeditious consideration of the Senate for the confirmation of appointment of 15 personal aides.

He said his action was premised on Section 151 of the constitution which requires the confirmation of the Senate.

He, therefore, said ” It is my hope that these requests will receive usual expeditious consideration from the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

NAN reports that Justice Mohammed was sworn in as the Acting CJN on Jan. 25, immediately after the then CJN, Justice Walter Onnoghen was suspended by Buhari.

The President in April requested and obtained the NJC’s consent to extend Muhammad’s acting tenure by the constitutionally-allowed three months.

NAN reports that on Wednesday the National Judicial Council recommended to President Buhari the appointment of Justice Muhammad as the substantive Chief Justice of Nigeria.