Stakeholders have called for a review of the role of the National Judicial Council (NJC) in discharging its responsibility for judicial appointments into the Superior Court of record.

This is contained in a communique presented by Dr Babatunde Ajibade, SAN, Chairman of the Joint Planning Committee at the end of a two-day National Summit on Justice.

The News Agency of Nigeria recalls that the theme of the summit was ‘Repositioning the Justice Sector in Nigeria: Constitutional Statutory and Operational Reforms for Access and Efficiency’

The stakeholders expressed concern over the fact that the Chief Justice of Nigeria, who is the chairman of the NJC is also the chairman of the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC) the body that initially reviews proposals or lists of candidates by appointment into judicial office.

The summit pointed out the seeming inconsistency between the CJN playing both roles, as it would appear that he is recommending candidates to himself being chairman of both bodies, and being the person who appoints a significant number of the members of both bodies other than those who are statutory members.

There’s a general consensus by the summit on the need to reconstitute or propose reconstitution of both the NJC and the FJSC.

On the role of the State Judicial Service Commission in judicial appointmens, the summit concluded that there was a significant need to ensure that composition of the SJSC is more diverse, that it reflects the interests of the users of the justice sector.

Stakeholders noted the fact that the current NJC guidelines may have subverted the intent of the constitutional provision, empowering the SJSC to make judicial appointments, rather than authorising the SJSC to prepare a shortlist of potential candidates for judicial appointments, appear to address that responsibility solely in the Chairman (Chief Judges of States).

Participants also proposed interventions in areas such as human rights protection, fair trial mechanisms, alternative dispute resolution, and technological advancements for a more efficient system.

On funding, budgeting and administration for the judiciary, the summit resolved
that the current process for funding the courts was totally deficient.

They noted that it was evident that the provisions of the Constitution as amended by the Fifth Amendment, authorising that funding for the State courts should be a joint effort carried out by the executive and the judiciary was not being implemented in any shape or form in the majority of the states.

Recommendations were made that this was something that needed to be pursued and dealt with decisively, as the summit stated that funding of the judiciary at the federal level is much better than what obtains in the States of the Federation.

Participants noted the need to professionalise the administration of the courts, as well as to appoint persons with clear administrative experience to be selected through a transparent process to administer the courts, and to separate the administration of the courts from the administration of justice.

On eradicating delays in the administration of justice agenda for leveraging the rules of procedure and effective case management in Nigeria, they  considered the importance of limiting the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, and ensuring that matters that would go to the Supreme Court would only be matters of significant national importance.

The summit also stated the need for there to be clarity as to who has the authority to discipline legal practitioners and also issues as to how to improve the efficiency of the disciplinary process for legal practitioners.

It was agreed that significant steps needed to be taken in these areas to enhance the quality of justice delivery in Nigeria and increase the confidence of members of the public in our justice sector.

Participants noted the commitment by the Attorney General of the Federation and by all stakeholders.

They stressed the need to quickly engage the resolutions into draft legislation that will be presented to the National Assembly for inclusion in the ongoing constitution review process, and also for non-constitutional related legislation to be implemented almost immediately. NAN)

Ann Eniyamire, the daughter of former Abuja Customary Court of Appeal President, Justice Moses Bello, on Wednesday, prayed an FCT High Court sitting in Bwari to declare that she is entitled to 11.11 per cent of all her late father’s property, including estates.

Eniyamire told Justice Mohammed Madugu, through her lawyer, Yahuza Mahraz, to grant her the entitlement in line with her late father’s will.

The Reports says that in the suit marked: CV/667/2024, Eniyamire sued Reverend Father Ezekiel Awolumate and Christ the King Catholic Church Okene Parish as 1st and 2nd defendants.

Her lawyer contended that his client was short-changed by the executor of the will, Reverend Father Ezekiel John (1st defendant) and another.

The claimant, in the affidavit attached to the motion, deposed that her late father instructed that all his assets be shared between his wife and the children following an 11.11 per cent sharing formula.

She, therefore, accused the defendants of adopting a sharing formula of 4.16 per cent.

Eniyamire, who has 38 reliefs, urged the court to reverse the alleged decision of the defendants, relieve them of their duties (as executors of her father’s will) and restore 11.11 per cent of her father’s property to her.

She also sought a declaration that the claimant is entitled to a share of 1/9 or 11.11 per cent of all her late father’s assets of shares and stocks.

She equally sought an order directing the defendants to account, tender and hand all necessary documents
with regards to administration, management and distribution of the estates of the claimant’s late father to any appointed administrator general, among others.

When the matter was called on Wednesday, Mahruz told the judge that hearing on his case was ripe.

But the defendants’ counsel, Adewale Adegboyega, told the judge that he had filed a preliminary objection challenging the competence of the suit.

Justice Madugu, who said it was not convenient to take the matter today, consolidated the defendants’ notice of preliminary objection and the claimant’s motions so that they could be taken together in tye next adjourned date.

He then adjourned the matter until June 4 for definite hearing.(NAN)

A Federal High Court Abuja, on Tuesday, fixed May 17 for a ruling on a bail application filed by the detained Binance executive, Tigran Gambaryan.

Justice Emeka Nwite fixed the date after counsel for the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and Gambaryan’s lawyer, Mark Mordi, SAN, adopted their processes and argued their case against and for the bail plea.

The judge had ordered the remand Gambaryan in Kuje Correctional Centre after he pleaded not guilty to the money laundering charges preferred against him by the EFCC.

The EFCC had accused Binance Holdings Limited, Gambaryan and Nadeem Anjarwalla, another agent of the company, of allegedly conspiring amongst themselves to conceal the origin of the financial proceeds of their alleged unlawful activities in Nigeria including $35,400, 000.

They were alleged to have committed an offence contrary to Section 21 (a) and punishable under Section 18(3) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, among others.

However, Anjarwalla escaped from lawful custody on March 22 and fled Nigeria for Kenya.

At the resumed hearing, Mordi told Justice Nwite to grant his client’s bail, arguing that the EFCC had failed to produce any credible evidence to oppose his application.

According to him, the complainant’s allegation that Gambaryan was arranging to escape from custody like his colleague was false.

“There is no exhibit or document displaying EFCC’s credible intelligence.

Iheanacho said the court would be taken a grave risk by granting the Binance agent a bail because he had no attachment to any community in Nigeria or competent person to stand as his surety.

He contended that Gambaryan attempted to apply for a new United States passport while in detention knowing fully well his International passport was seized by the Nigerian state.

The lawyer said he was a flight risk and that if granted bail, he would jump bail like his colleague.

He disagreed with Mordi that the commission had not provided credible evidence that Gambaryan was planning to escape.

He said going by the deposition in their counter affidavit, the deponent was one of the investigative team that investigated the case.

He urged the court to dismissed the bail application.

In the alternative, he advised the court to return the applicant to EFCC custody if the judge decides to grant him bail.

Justice Nwite then fixed May 17 for ruling.(NAN)