03 March, 2013

ARCHIBONG PETITIONS JONATHAN, ALLEGES MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE


DISGRACED Federal High Court judge, Justice Charles Efanga Archibong, has petitioned President Goodluck Jonathan to restore him to the position from which the president compulsorily retired him last Monday.
In the petition, which was copied to Chief Justice of the Federation, the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the judge claimed unfair hearing and miscarriage of justice against him by the National Judicial Council (NJC).
He specifically asked the President to rescind/withdraw acceptance/approval of the NJC’s recommendation that he be compulsorily retired as judge of the Federal High Court.
The judge’s troubles started last year when two petitions were written against him to the NJC.

In the first petition, Chief J.B Dauda, one of the prosecuting counsel for the EFCC, complained that Justice Archibong had dismissed, without a plea or considering the gravamen of the charges preferred, the grievious charge of criminal infractions against Dr. Erastus Akingbola, former Managing Director of Intercontinental Bank Plc.
Some of the alleged breaches were fraudulent conversion, obtaining by false pretense, money laundering, market manipulation, loan scam, and fraudulent and wrongful trading of securities, amounting to N346,185,841,243.75 and £10,925,649.58.
The judge also reportedly made some pronouncement on the professional competence of the prosecuting team of six Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN), comprising Damien Dodo, A.B Mahmoud, Kola Awodein, Konyinsola Ajayi, E.C Ukala and J.B Daudu.
In the second petition by Chief Olajide Ajana, counsel for a faction of PDP in Ogun State, the judge was alleged to have issued a Bench Warrant against respondents that were not served the contempt application before him (judge) and for granting the main reliefs in an application that was not moved ex parte.
Following the petitions, the then Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Dahiru Musdapher, asked for Justice Archibong’s comments, which he gave in July 2012.
The judge said he exercised his discretion to terminate proceedings in the case against Dr. Akingbola due to lack of diligent prosecution by the counsel, who, “for the umpteenth time in three years sought leave to amend charges.”
“The Prosecution Team’s response to each challenge was an application to further amend charges,” the judge said.
“In point of fact, at the time I terminated proceedings, the prosecution had effectively been permitted to withdraw the existing charges yet again, declined to present fresh charges but rather decided to embark on an appeal specifically prohibited by provisions of the EFCC Act.”
In any case, Justice Archibong stated that the order disbanding the team was made on the Attorney General of the Federation, adding that, “any talk of the judge frustrating an appeal by counsel of the Prosecution Team is totally baseless.”
He said he did not discharge Akingbola, as widely suggested, as the accused’s properties were still attached by the State.
“The effort to get Akingbola to give an account of his stewardship of his Bank was simply frustrated by the prosecution team’s incompetence, an uncomfortable but very self-evident fact,” he said.
On Chief Ajana’s petition, Justice Archibong said the counsel “represented serial contemnors” and that his petition should be discarded “without much ado.”
Perhaps, not content with mere written response to the allegations, he specifically asked to be granted audience by the NJC, noting that the petitioners were people who could make representations, written and unwritten, formal and informal at various levels; a privilege he did not have as a judge.
The NJC Investigation Committee did not grant him (or any of the parties) the privilege of appearing before it to defend the allegations against him.
However, the three-member committee, headed by the Chief Judge of Benue State, Justice I. Hwande, sat on Wednesday, November 21, 2012, to consider the case.
Noting that, “all facts were complete with regard to the submission by the Petitioners and the response by the Judge,” the committee decided not to invite the parties, “as it had sufficient evidence before it to deliberate on the matter.”
And having looked at the petitions and the response of Justice Archibong, the Investigation Committee formulated eight issues for determination, including the reported discharging of Akingbola without taken his plea; the judge describing the prosecuting lawyers as indolent and incompetent, and a drain on public purse; his alleged refusal to release the Certified True Copy of his ruling to the EFCC; issuance of arrest warrant on parties without due service on the parties; and whether the judge was in order in dismissing application that was never heard on the ground of incompetence.
 The committee eventually found Justice Archibong culpable in all but one allegation, which is that, “from available records, it was not established that the Judge called in Journalists into his chambers, as alleged in the petition,” by availing them of his handwritten note and telling them the names of the Senior Advocates of Nigeria he was referring to as being incompetent, indolent and drain on public purse.
In conclusion, the Investigation Committee recommended only a warning to and supervision of Justice Archibong.
It said: “From the totality of evidence before the Committee as gleaned from the records, we are satisfied that the Judge misconducted himself in his utterances and conduct of cases before him.
“We therefore recommend that he be warned seriously to henceforth conduct himself with decorum and to upgrade his knowledge of the law. In addition, his Head of Court should closely monitor him and ascertain the type of cases he assigns to him.”
Nonetheless, Justice Archibong wondered why his own complaint to the Privileges Committee of the NJC, as regards the conduct of the prosecutors, was not considered, stressing, “the NJC treated my complaint as a non-issue and decided to not only put me on trial, but joined in the campaign of calumny waged by my accusers.”
He dismissed the NJC’s labeling him as “lacking a full grasp of the law and procedure of the Court,” stating that only last month (February 2013), the Performance Evaluation and Monitoring Committee of the same NJC gave him a commendation in writing.
Still, at an emergency meeting on February 20, 2013, the NJC, alluding to the report of the Investigation Committee, suspended Justice Archibong from office and recommended to President Jonathan to compulsorily retirement him from office.
Part of the letter of the same day, signed by the CJN and Chairman of the NJC, Justice Mukhtar, reads:
“After the investigation, the committee, before which you (Archibong) appeared and was heard, submitted a report to the National Judicial Council, which was deliberated upon… After deliberation, Council accepted the ‘Findings’ of the committee and had accordingly recommended your compulsory retirement to the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
“Consequently, acting pursuant to the powers conferred on it under the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended, the Council decided to suspend you with immediate effect from office as a Judge of the Federal High Court, pending when the President will act on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council.”
Commenting on the punishment meted out to him, Justice Archibong likened the Chief Justice to the committee that investigated him without interviewing or hearing from any of the parties at issue.
He accused the CJN of not only denying him the right of fair hearing, “she obviously subverted the whole process and lied to the President that I had appeared before her committee ‘and was heard.’”
“I do not know what the CJN’s agenda is but she has denied a serving Judge of this Federal Republic of Nigeria fair hearing, and subverted due process, engaging in constitutional infractions aplenty,” the judge said.
Justice Archibong accused the NJC of ignorance of the law by equating “error with misconduct.”
His word: “They (NJC) have displayed ignorance of the law and mischievously equated error with misconduct, obviously to satisfy whatever aims and objectives they were pursuing.
“Certainly not to ensure equitable and clean dispensation of justice by humans not tainted by fear or favour, not guided by the imperatives other than those dictated by the oath of judicial office.”
The judge said the NJC endorsed the committee’s efforts, “confusing the number of petitions against me, a very busy Judge with a large docket of cases, with the veracity of the claims contained therein, the merits of any defence regardless.”
Justice Archibong said the CJN jettisoned the recommendation of the investigating committee (which was a ‘warning’) and “unilaterally superimposed the ultimate draconian sanction of ‘compulsory retirement’ in her characteristic, dictatorial manner at any meeting, which she called...”
Therefore, his humble appeal to Jonathan is: “I petition Mr. President to rescind/withdraw the acceptance/approval of the NJC’s recommendation that I be retired compulsorily as a Judge of the Federal High Court of Nigeria.”
Source: Guardian

No comments:

Post a Comment

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...