THE much-flaunted reform of the nation's judiciary may have moved closer to fruition with the recent submission of report by the stakeholders committee on the issue. But reports of disagreement within the committee over salient aspects of the proposed reform are unsettling as they indicate that all may not be well with the exercise. However, the fact that the leadership of the judiciary is studying the report with a view to adopting some of its recommendations is hope enough that the country has not lost a unique chance to refurbish an embattled institution.What is required is for Chief Justice of the Federation(CJN), Justice Dahiru Musdapher, to 'thoroughly study the report' as he promised, with a view to putting into motion machinery for its implementation. In doing this, the CJN must not lose sight of the fact that the country places huge premium on the judiciary as the last hope not only of the common man, but of all citizens.Secondly, it must be appreciated that the judiciary as an institution suffered severe damage to its reputation with the recent rift between the immediate past CJN, Justice Alloysius Katsina-Alu, and the immediate past President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Ayo Salami. Underlying this disagreement are allegations of corruption against judges and other judicial officers; and the notion that the institution may have been compromised.Therefore, Justice Musdapher touched on the kernel of his challenge, which he noted was to 'restore the judiciary to its former glory and rekindle public trust' in the institution.The 29-member committee appointed by Justice Musdapher submitted its report, leaving, according to reports, some issues unresolved as some members declined to sign the report based on their disagreement with the majority recommendations. The contentious issues include whether the CJN should retain the chairmanship of the National Judicial Council (NJC) under its existing composition.This contention is understandably raised against the controversial role played by the NJC in its attempt to resolve the feud between Justice Katsina-Alu and Salami. The NJC was accused of being biased and sympathetic to a party to the dispute. Naturally, there were proposals that a neutral person, not a serving judge, be made to head the NJC.According to reports still, the contentious aspects of the report of the Judicial Reform Committee headed by Justice Muhammadu Uwais (former CJN) centre on whether to allow members of the public to have input into judges' appointment; and whether to retain or sack judges who have been consistently performing below average.Justice Lawal reportedly confirmed that the President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Chief Joseph Daudu; and two former presidents of the association, Chief Olisa Agbakoba and Rotimi Akeredolu, all Senior Advocates of Nigeria, did not sign the committee's report as members. Although there is no confirmation of the reasons behind the trio's non-endorsement of the report, the contentious issues may have proved too divisive.It is imperative that Chief Justice Musdapher does a thorough job before coming out with a final verdict. Importantly, the other areas worked on by the committee are equally sensitive. They include the trial process, procedural inefficiencies, poor infrastructure, poor conditions of service, declining intellectual quality and reasoning content of delivered judgments; and corruption. The committee was inaugurated on October 14, this year.Beyond the issues listed for the committee's direct attention, Nigerians expect the redeeming measures from its report to also address salient issues in the sector identified at various fora by Justice Musdapher. These include concern about alleged interference by governors on judicial matters, resulting in lack of independence of the institution.There is the need to actualise the CJN's admonition that judges dispose of corruption cases within six months; the need to protect the sanctity of the courts and judges; the need for judges to be above board in terms of integrity; and the need to revisit plea bargain practice, which Justice Musdapher noted has no place in the country's laws, having been invented as it were, to provide soft landing for treasury looters.There is little doubt that most of the CJN's suggestions and observations about the lapses in the judiciary enjoy the public's appreciation. In the recent past, the leadership of the judiciary tended more to shield the institution from public criticism, rather than expose its shortcomings. The judiciary needs more inward examination, such as that provided by Justice Musdapher, to correct its deficiencies.Reforming the judiciary along the line of public good has become even more crucial to bridge the yawning gap between official intention and actual achievement on development. The CJN, as the head of judiciary and as a person seen as part of the systemic disorder in the institution, has an onerous task to reverse the unsavoury public perception. He should go all the way to ensure that the suggestions become a reality through his administrative actions; and through initiatives to reform the constitution.The judiciary's image can only be respected if corrupt judges are unmasked and punished; and if judges stop making pronouncements that are manifestly against public interest. Beyond these, the CJN must show leadership by good example. And he should be mindful of his limited time to reform the institution.
Click here to read full news..
