The Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Mahmud Mohammed, said on Monday that the National Judicial Council was prepared to sanction judges found culpable of corrupt practices.
The CJN, who doubles as the Chairman of NJC, said this in Abuja in his opening remarks at the 2016 refresher course for judicial officers on current trends in law and administration of justice.
The event, organised by the National Judicial Institute, was with the theme, ‘Promoting judicial performance through innovations and reforms’.
“It bears reminding that Your Lordships have sworn to adhere to your Oath of Office as contained in the 1999 Constitution and the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers, 2003.
“Indeed, let me reiterate that where any judicial officer is found culpable of corrupt practice, you can be rest assured of the preparedness and resolve of the National Judicial Council to sanction such Judicial Officer appropriately,” the CJN said.
The CJN, who is also the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the NJI, called on judges at all levels to join hands with patriotic citizens in the campaign for “zero-tolerance for corrupt practices within our courts”.
Justice Mohammed said in an era when the judiciary had been “harshly” judged as being corrupt, judges must shun corruption and live above board in order to establish public confidence.
He said, “The negative effects of corruption have been experienced by every Nigerian in one way or the other.
“It also bears reminding that the Judiciary has been judged harshly and on the receiving end of allegations of corruption in its operations.
“At this crucial time in our nation’s history, we must show the red card to corruption, while joining hands as patriotic citizens to campaign for zero-tolerance for corrupt practices within our courts.
“We must not forget our noble duty as ministers in the temple of justice to uphold the rule of law impartially and without fear.
“In order to establish and sustain public confidence in the judicial process, judges must live above board, shun corruption, and avoid corrupt practices and misconduct.”
The CJN also lauded the new Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 and urged judges to be “stringent in applying the law strictly”.
He also called on judges to treat corruption cases with urgency in order to ensure that justice was done to all parties involved.
The CJN added, “I must similarly urge Your Lordships to treat cases related to economic crimes and corruption with the necessary urgency that the previously mentioned 2013 Practice Directions mandate us to apply.
“Judges must also be stringent in applying the law strictly in order to render justice in a satisfactory manner to all parties whether they are the state, the accused or the victim.”
He hailed the new law, particularly for its provisions which had put an end to interlocutory applications deployed by high profile suspects to stall their trial.
He said though the judiciary was being unjustly ciriticised for delay in corruption trials, it had, as far back as 2013, adopted a practice direction mandating that such cases should be heard on a daily basis.
He said, “My Lords, as you all are well aware, the judiciary has had to endure intense, largely unjustified and grossly uninformed criticisms regarding delay in the administration of justice.
“However, I am proud that the judiciary was well ahead of the curve when the 2013 Practice Directions on Serious Crimes were adopted as the Directions were aimed at reducing criminal trial delays.
“Nonetheless, the new Act strengthens our resolve as it provides that applications for stay of proceedings shall no longer be heard in respect of a criminal matter before the court.
“This unprecedented provision puts a stop to the delays occasioned by interlocutory applications to stay proceedings pending appeal on preliminary matters when the substantive issues are yet to be tried on the merits.
“Upon arraignment, the trial of the defendant shall proceed from day-to-day until the conclusion of the trial, while each party is entitled to only five adjournments not exceeding two weeks each. Where the trial is still not concluded, the interval for adjournments will be provisions will be fully utilised.”
PUNCH
