The rumour that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu held a telephone conversation with the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Olukayode Ariwoola, over the outcome of the petitions filed against the 2023 presidential election is a stark indication of the desperation of some politicians seeking political office and the crisis of confidence in the judiciary, both of which pose a serious threat to the country’s corporate existence. The frequency and consistency of such destabilising campaigns should be worrisome to peace-loving Nigerians.
Besides the phoney telephone conversation, fake news was also peddled that a judge of the Court of Appeal had resigned following pressure on him to deliberately pervert the course of justice. Nigerians will recall that shortly after the presidential elections, it was also falsely circulated that the CJN disguised as a destitute in order to meet Tinubu in London over the dispute on the election result. Nigerians may expect more of such campaigns in the days and weeks ahead; but that does not reduce anything from the danger thus posed to the country in general and the judiciary in particular.
Intimidation of the judiciary, particularly in the social media, with trumped-up accusations has the potential and tendency to pervert the course of justice; and by maligning the judges in the course of performing their constitutional responsibilities, such messages are distasteful. They may in fact occasion more damages to the judiciary institution than the mischief, real or imagined that the purveyors are seeking to cure. The temple of justice, including the judicial officers, has received a lot of battering and insinuations that are antithetical to their independence and sacredness. There is no doubt that a few judgements and pronouncements that emanated from the courts in the past few years are seemingly confounding; and certainly difficult for some Nigerians to swallow as justice served. Incidentally, some of such judgements were appealed to higher courts, and some are still pending. However, it is dangerous and inimical to the judiciary as an arm of government to imply that the entire institution is totally compromised. Their Lordships of course, have a lot of work to do to reverse this impression and redeem their image battered by resentments and protests that trailed some of their verdicts, and which may be invoking the deadly rumours about their official activities.
The rumour, which circulated in the social media created the impression that the alleged conversation by the CJN with President Tinubu and the Director General of the Department of State Services (DSS) was meant to put pressure on the Presidential Election Petitions Court (PEPC) on the judgement to deliver.
But the Supreme Court, through the Director of Press and Information, Dr Akande Festus, said there was no iota of truth in the narrative as there was no such telephone conversation between the CJN and anyone. The fact that till today, nobody has presented any evidence of the conversation, clearly points to the fact that those behind the rumour were up to some mischief, probably to pre-empt the tribunal or put undue pressure on the judges. The apex court, which lamented the development, said, “If this current trend of falsehood and mudslinging is sustained, our nation may not make desired progress. The courts are statutorily established to serve the best interest of the masses and we are ever poised to do that to the best of our ability.” The highest court of the land pleaded with Nigerians to cooperate with the judiciary to serve the country to its full capacity, promising that no one would ever be favoured against the other.
On the heels of the rumour was another report in the social media claiming that a member of the presidential election court, Justice Ugo, resigned because he believed taking side with Tinubu against those challenging the President’s victory would mean the death of the nation’s democracy. A twitter user, Umar Sani, claimed that Justice Ugo, in a letter, said he was asked to “cripple independence of the judiciary” by ruling in favour of a particular candidate believed to be Tinubu. Swiftly, the Chief Registrar of the Court of Appeal, Umar Mohammed Bangari, dismissed the report as fake news and asked Nigerians to ignore it.
It is worrisome that the judiciary, which is considered the bastion of democracy, is being made to become an institution of ridicule in Nigeria. Among the things that open the temple of justice to ridicule are the desperation of people seeking to occupy political offices and those who are bent on keeping offices already occupied whether or not they are the rightful occupants, as well as the perceived inconsistency and unethical behaviour of some judicial officers, particularly the judges, handling some cases. It is common, during election time, for allegations, counter-allegations, protests and litigation to trail the conduct of the exercise. There are genuine and baseless complaints. Some people or political parties feel that if they cannot win at the polls, they can win at the courts, depending on how clever they can pursue their case. Unfortunately, their belief in the use of subterfuge to get victory is reinforced by precedents that can be found in some court judgments that declared as winners of election candidates generally considered not qualified to get it.
Discrediting the judiciary, such an institution with crucial roles to play in survival of democracy, without evidence is a recipe for crisis and should be shunned by all lovers of peace. The same goes for politicians with a penchant for perverting the course of justice for parochial interest and personal aggrandisement. Railroading the judiciary into decisions that sabotage the facts and merit of a case is encouraging judicial fraud, an invitation to anarchy. Nigerians who are in position of power, wealth and influence to perpetrate these acts are advised not to set the country on fire for personal gain.
In the same breath, the judiciary must heal itself of the perception as a compromised or compromisable institution where judgements can be bought by the highest bidder. It is instructive for the judges to know that the diminishing confidence in the temple of justice in the country can be stemmed by always considering national interest in their verdicts.
It is true that the courts are expected to serve justice based on the facts before them, but when majority of the people, including those who have never seen the four walls of a school, are not convinced that, based on the facts of a case, the judgement of the court has served justice, the confidence in the judiciary will wane. One of such verdicts is that of the Supreme Court which declared the former Senate President, Ahmad Lawan as the Senatorial candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) for Yobe North district. The general feeling and expectation was that the verdict should have been in favour of Bashir Machina. The Supreme Court is considered as a policy court, meaning that it is not expected to deal with technicalities but the real case. That the apex court chose not to deal with such an issue of high policy on whether a particular person should be the occupant of a senatorial seat, just because the case was brought through a particular process known as originating summons instead of writ of summons, shocked Nigerians.
Another judgement that raised Nigerians’ eyebrows was that which did not allow James Faleke, the running mate to the late Kogi APC governorship candidate, Abubakar Audu, to become the party’s governorship candidate, because it was a joint ticket, whereas in Bayelsa State, the same apex court, for the same reason of joint ticket, voided the electoral victory of the APC governorship candidate, Mr. David Pereworimin Lyon because his running mate, Mr. Degi-Eremienyo gave false information to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). There is also the verdict that removed Ihedioha as governor of Imo State and made the fourth candidate in terms of votes scored the governor.
Wherever people are often disenchanted with the judgements of the courts, democracy is in danger and anarchy looms, because the judiciary is the last hope of the common man. Nigerians should restrain themselves from leveling false accusations against the judiciary and corrupting judicial officials in the discharge of their official responsibilities. By the same token, the judges need to do something about the huge trust deficit in the judiciary by ensuring that national interest is paramount in their judgements.
Nigerians must refrain from doing anything that is capable of bringing the nation down and throwing everything into disarray, realising that when the walls of a building go down, the roof is not left standing.
END
Be the first to comment