In relation to Nigeria, its a fair statement to make that building a cohesive and peaceful democractic system requires abiding by the constitutional framework, and applying pragmatic basic justice principles. Whilst non-selectively continuing the fight against dishonest gains. However, concrete credible structures is so niche in development.
In January 2019, the Presidency took a decision to displace the Chief Justice of Nigeria ignoring the National Judicial Council’s place, this would be akin to intefering with the legislative arm by requesting the Senate President to step down by executive fiat. The requirement of law appears not to have been followed. The three arms of government need not be viewed from the lens of an archiac structure that needs be observed slavishly, but rather a viably copped systemic arrangement that guarantees independence and checks, needless say balance, neither is powers to be by decree or monarchical in nature. At least for the time being.
Two fundamental principles seems to have been breached, perhaps on poor advice. First, justice needs to be done but also seen to be done, in this case there is an alternative blindness that has gripped the State, rather than towards impartiality. Its like the role of the Court shifted. Each arm is productive and efficient when it performs its role. There is a perception of external and internal usurpation. The official outcry by the national legal association- NBA, as well as the EU, UK and American governments, all issuing statements appearing to denounce this attempt, points to the strong potential for chaos.
Where this attempt was done to the Senate President, and was subsequently ignored by carrying on of duties, would there be a fuss? The passing of time may shift opinions, unless resolved. I wonder if something can be built on a none existing structure. Second principle, is separation of powers for Nigeria’s democratic hegemony, where each arm or institution has it within itself to exercise leadership but complimentarily not absolutely, with the others. State leadership requires strong institutions. There is however a responsibility to maintain.
Where there is criminal allegation against the CJN then a competent and appriopriately constituted authority ought to hear same, prior to any ‘suspension’ or forced vacation, removal or dismissal. Of course, corruption cannot be condoned at the peak of judicial affairs, but the approriate Council has to be evidence led in her recommendations and decisions, including to dismiss- that Council I suggest is not the Executive Council. To rectify the impasse i suggest- the CJN and the supporting associates, has been foisted a moment in history and time to define the extent of the power of the Presidency, the NJC need to take credible steps to affirm its structures, the Senate would now need subsequently in moral solidarity to pass a resolution on whether there has been constitutional compliance. Consider the combined effects of 153, 292 of 1999 Constitution, the provisions of the, Judicial Disipline Regulations 2017, National Judicial Institute Act 2004. I doubt Executive encroachment is ideal, it is sufficient to say that’s clear, and potrarys the Nigeria State as weak as a unit. Except there is an update to the judicial rules. Instituions needs to be acting in concert, and setting traditions which can be built on, that supports independence of the judiciary from unsubstantiated political controls.
For Nigeria’s democracy to grow there has to be willingness to understand the constitutional framework and seek interpretations where absurd. Exercising justice against corruption must be seen to be done, and the Courts would have to also lead on this. Also I think with political elections approaching, and for a fledging democracy, the dignity of a people must be upheld and positive restrictions needs to be clear. Also public concerns have been raised on appointments been heavily tilted towards one region, again this has to be evidence led, and the constitutional requirement of ‘federal character’ is a very persuasive argument for cohesion, as both the North, East, West, South would all need to feel part of the government’s executive branches. Nigeria must choose to learn from the Tutsi-Hutu conflict experience, and rather pitch its tent towards maintaining strong internal cooperation. Also, bear in mind our neighbours are keen to learn from and aid our progress, but notably would not encourage unnecessary risks to their interests. I think leadership is an opportunity to preserve and improve lives, therefore those in different forms of authority, in that time span, have a responsibility to good governance.
How about taking necessary retractable and ‘preliminary’ steps forward to ensuring that in a visible way cohesive strength is built as need be, in a credible and dispassionate way?
