After examining the petitions alleging misconduct against the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter Onnoghen, and the acting Chief Justice, Justice Tanko Muhammad, the National Judicial Council (NJC) Wednesday said in Abuja that it had sent its findings to President Muhammadu Buhari for action. Huhuonline.com can authoritatively report that owing to the gravity of the improprieties committed by Justice Onnoghen, the NJC has recommended his retirement to President Buhari. The NJC resolved that “…by the nature of the decision reached, it would be inappropriate to publicise it before conveying it to Mr. President,” noted a statement by the Council’s Director of Information, Mr. Soji Oye.
The NJC had in January set up a five-man committee to treat sundry petitions against the two topmost judicial officers as well as the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), Mr. Danladi Umar. The committee reviewed a new dossier provided by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) of the improprieties committed by Onnoghen; who is now facing trial at the Code of Conduct Tribunal for false asset declaration. The dossier, by way of a “final address” was sent by EFCC lawyers to the NJC and the shocking details informed the decision of the Council to send the sealed recommendation to President Buhari. It remains unclear when the President will act on the recommendation and whether, asking Onnoghen to retire and save himself and the judiciary further odium will end the case at the CCT.
In the dossier prepared by Ekele Iheanacho and Rotimi Oyedepo Iseoluwa, the EFCC catalogued various allegations against Onnoghen, raising questions over the legitimacy of $1,716,000 deposited, over time, into his domiciliary account at Standard Chartered Bank and monies found in other accounts. “It is clear that these huge sums of money were not earned by the Respondent (Onnoghen) as his salaries and allowances”, the EFCC said in its submission.
The letter cited the transactions between Joe Agi, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, (SAN) and Onnoghen, and the contradictory statements made by the duo over a Mercedes Benz 450 worth N7million bought for Onnoghen by Agi in 2009 and a $30,000 deposited into Onnoghen’s account by Agi. Onnoghen claimed he paid for the Mercedes Benz in tranches, Agi claimed he bought the car on Onnoghen’s behalf with cash. On the $30,000, Onnoghen claimed he gave Agi the money to deposit on his behalf. Agi said he could not recall collecting such an amount of money from Onnoghen. “I will be surprised if the money Onnoghen gave me was up to $30,000.00 as I cannot remember taking $30,000 USD from Justice Onnoghen. $30,000 USD is big money to take at a go,” Agi was quoted in his testimony to the EFCC. The Commission also listed five senior lawyers who paid ‘pecuniary gifts’ into Onnoghen’s account at various times in 2015.
The NJC had in January given both Onnoghen and Muhammad seven days to respond to various petitions written against them. The directive was part of decision the body made at its emergency meeting in Abuja held on January 29, 2019 to look into the issue of the suspension of Onnoghen.
Buhari had on January 25, 2019, based on an alleged ex parte order by the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), suspended Onnoghen as CJN and Chairman of the NJC. He subsequently swore in Justice Tanko Muhammad as Acting CJN to pilot the affairs of the Supreme Court in the interim.
The action, which attracted global concern as well as protest by various groups in the country, resulted in various petitions seeking the intervention of the NJC in the matter. While both Onnoghen and Muhammad recused themselves from the meeting, a former president of the Court of Appeal, Justice Umaru Abdullahi, was elected to preside as interim chairman. It was disclosed that the NJC at the January 29 meeting considered four petitions in all; one against Onnoghen, two against Muhammad and the other against the CCT Chairman, Danladi Umar.
The petition against Onnoghen was by one Zikhrillahi Ibrahim of Resource Centre for Human Rights & Civil Education; while the two against Muhammad, were by Centre for Justice and Peace Initiative and Chief Olisa Agbakoba SAN, and that against Danladi Yakubu Umar, Chairman, Code of Conduct Tribunal, was by Centre for Justice and Peace Initiative.
When the NJC met Wednesday in an emergency meeting to consider the report of the five-man committee constituted to investigate the allegations of misconduct made against Justices Onnoghen and Muhammad, the Council refrained from taking any decision on the issue of asset declaration charges on the grounds that the issue is currently in court. “Council decided that the allegations relating to assets declaration that were levelled against Justice Onnoghen were subjudice and therefore abstained from considering them. Council reached a decision on the petitions written by Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and others and conveyed its decision to President Muhammadu Buhari.” That decision, Huhuonline.com learnt from NJC sources, was that the President should demand and accept the resignation of the embattled Justice Onnoghen.
Here is the full statement by the EFCC to NJC:
BETWEEN: THE ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL CRIMES COMMISSION AND JUSTICE WALTER SAMUEL NKANU ONNOGHEN GCON.
The Petitioner’s Final Address In Respect Of Petition On Financial Impropriety, Infidelity To The Constitution And Other Economic And Financial Crimes Related Laws Against Hon. Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen, GCON.
INTRODUCTION
My lords, by petition dated the 4th day of February, 2019 signed by the Ag. Executive Chairman, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (hereinafter called, petitioner) to the Chairman, National Judicial Council, allegations of Financial Impropriety, Infidelity To The Constitution And Other Economic And Financial Crimes Related Laws were leveled against the Respondent. See exhibit P10.
Furthermore, my lords, by another letter dated the 5th day of March,2019, the Petitioner forwarded additional facts and findings to the Chairman of the Council which letter was referred to this Honourable Committee for necessary action. The petitioner adopted this additional facts and finding before this Committee and was admitted and marked exhibit P10A.
My lords, at the hearing of this petition, the petitioner called 7 witnesses and tendered documentary evidence which were admitted and marked as shown in the table below:
S/N PARTICULARS OF THE EXHIBIT EXHIBIT NUMBER
1 RESPONDENT’S ACCOUNT HERITAGE BANKC P1
2 LETTER FROM HERITAGE BANK DATED 24/10/16 FORWARDING THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT OF THE RESPONDENT TO EFCC P2
3 RESPONDENTS UNION BANK SALARY ACCOUNT P3
4 RESPONDENT’S STANDARD CHARTERED BANK STATEMENTS OF ACCOUNT –
I. Naira Account (015001062693) – P4
II. Naira Account (0100260075400) – P4A
III. GBP Account (2850160075400) – P4B
IV. USD Account (8700260075400) – P4C1 & 4C2
V. Euro Account (9350160075400) – P4D
VI. Investment Portfolio Statements – P4E
P4-P4E
5 UBA STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT OF NGOZI LAURA P5
6 INTERNAL MEMO FROM PROTOCOL UNIT SUPREME COURT TO THE CHEIF REGISTRAR DATED 11 Oct. 2018 P6
7 CIRCULAR TO ALL HEADS COURT DATED 28 MAY 2007 P7
8 LETTER FROM THE SUPREME COURT DATED 19TH FEBRUARY, 2019 TO EFCC WITH ATTACHED REGISTERED OF CASH SIGNED FOR AND RECEIVED BY THE RESPONDENT P8
9 FEDERAL TREASURY (CIRCULAR ON E-PAYMENT) DATED 22ND OCTOBER, 2008 P9
10 PETITION DATED 4TH FEBRUARY,2019 P10
11 EFCC LETTTER DATED 5TH MARCH,2019FORWARDING ADDITIONAL FACTS TO NJC LETTER P10A
12 RESPONDENT’S STATEMENT TO CCB P11
13 RESPONDENT’S ASSET DECLARATION FORMS P12
14 SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT (CHIEF I. OHAKIM& ANOR V CHIEF MARTIN AGBASO& ANOR) (2010) NWLR (PT1226) 172 S.C, Suit No. SC3/2010 P13
15 STATEMENT OF JAMES ONOJA, SAN TO EFCC DATED 11TH AND 12TH MARCH 2019 P14 & P 15
16 STATEMENT OF IKPEAZU ONYEACHI, SAN TO EFCC DATED 4TH MARCH 2019 P16
17 Statement of Paul Usoro, SAN to EFCC Dated 4th March, 2019 P17
18 Statement of Emeka Etiaba, SAN to EFCC Dated 4th March, 2019 P18
19 Statement of Joe Agi, SAN to EFCC Dated 6th Feb. 2019 P19
20 Statement of Joe Agi, SAN to EFCC Dated 7th Feb. 2019 P20
21 Statement of Joe Agi, SAN to EFCC Dated 1 March 2019 P21
It is also worthy of note that exhibits P17-P21 were tendered by the Respondent through PW7 Hary Erin, the Investigating Officer of the Petitioner.
My lords, the Respondent called the Acting Director of Finance and Account of the Supreme Court and also testified on his own behalf. In the course of his defence, the Respondent tendered documentary evidence through DW1 and himself. The exhibits are as shown in the table below:
S/N PARTICULARS OF THE EVIDENCE EXHIBIT NUMBER
1 Financial Regulations of the FRN p.80-81, Rule 1411, 1412 (II)&(III) Dated January 2009 R1
2 Foreign Currency (Domiciliary Accounts) Act Cap 151, LFN 1985 R2
3 Foreign Exchange (Monitoring and Miscellaneous Provisions) Decree N0. 17, 1995 R3
4 Judgment of the FCT High Court in Suit No. FCT/HC/CR/21/2016 delivered 2017 R4
5 Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Appeal No. CA/A/371c/2017 delivered 2018 R5
6 Respondent’s response to the first petition dated 4th February,2019 R6
7 Respondent’s response to EFCC’S Petition dated 19th February,2019 R7
8 Respondent’s response to EFCC’S ADDITIONAL FACT R8
9 Wedding Invitation for the Respondent’s Daughter R9
10 PURPORTED PRINT OUT FROM THE EFCC WEBSITE R10
ISSUE FOR DETERMINATION
We respectively submit that the sole issue for the determination of this Honourable Committee is whether in view of the evidence adduced by the Petitioner, it can be said that the Respondent has not breached the Code of conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
ARGUMENT ON THE ISSUE
My lords, it is our humble submission that from the evidence on record, it cannot be said that the Respondent has not breached the Code of Conducts for Judicial Officers. My lords by virtue of his appointment as a Judicial Officer, the Respondent has a duty to actively participate in establishing, maintaining, enforcing and observing a high standard of conduct that will ensure and preserve transparently the integrity of the Judiciary. The Respondent is also duty bond, in the performance of his duties to adhere and observe strictly the rules set out in the Code of conduct for Judicial Officer and failure to do so automatically constitutes misconduct. We humbly refer my lords to the Preamble to the Code of Conduct for Judicial
It is must be stated that the Code of Conduct for the Judicial Officers serves as the minimum standard of conduct to be observed by each and every judicial Officers. My lords, this explains why the preamble to the code provides: “therefore, this code of conduct for Judicial Offices of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is hereby adopted to serve as the minimum standard of conduct to be observed by each and every Judicial officer as defined in this code”
