 |
| Barr. Alphonsus Ogar Eba |
"It was said a long time ago, that all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to say nothing"
In similar vain, I want to say that, truth is distorted, when those who know decide to maintain a conspiracy of silence.
Compelled and strengthened by an inate sense of patriotism, my fair knowledge of law and the facts leading to the rejection of the confirmation of my Lord, Justice Akon Ikpeme as substantive CJ by the CRSHA on the 2nd day of March 2020, I wish to state that the whole issue revolves around a triangular legal compass of S. 271 (1) ( 4) and (5) of the CFRN 1999 (as amended)
I humbly urge every rightly guided thinking human being to insulate him or herself from the divisive baseless rumour that my Noble Lord Justice Akon Ikpeme was rejected because she is an Akwa Ibomite and rather take a look at the above constitutional provision with the view to pointing out the infractions ( if any) that was breached in this regard.
S. 271 (1) of the CFRN 1999 supra provides that the appointment of a chief judge of a state shall be made by the Governor of the state on the recommendation of the NJC subject to confirmation by the House of Assembly of that state and no other body. (emphasis mine)
A community reading of the above provision with respect to the issue in Cross River State shows that, His Excellency, the Governor of CRS in exercise of his power appointed justice Ikpeme after receipt of a recommendation from the NJC.
On receipt of the appointment of justice ikpeme, the house invited Justice Ikpeme for screening and was pleased with her very rich resume but decided to refer the matter to its committee on Judiciary.
The irreconcilable report of majority of Six (6) members to one (1) in the committee against her confirmation was the beginning of the crisis that became the platform for the division that has snowballed into incongruous pararell lines.
I was presented in plenary and I must say that I commend the leadership of the House for throwing away both majority and minority reports with all its putrid, obnoxious and divisive recommendations.
However, I must confess and concede that the subsequent decision of the House committee of the whole which was arrived at after the reports were thrown away and which was arrived at on grounds of security threats anchored on S. 14 (2) (b) of the CFRN 1999 supra arguably also, found a better pillar to stand on rather than the issue of her origin which the House discarded for being toxic and incongruent with the spirit of the fundamental principles of Government that abhors discrimination on the basis of race, tribe, religion, sex, etc.
The crux of this piece is narrowed towards providing a convincing answer to the sole fundamental question surrounding this whole issue which is, DID THE CROSS RIVER STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOLLOW THE CONSTITUTIONAL DUE PROCESS UNDER S. 271 (1) OF THE CFRN 1999 SUPRA?
The answer to this question in my humble view must be isolated from the alleged political, tribal, ethnic, socio - economic considerations and focused purely on law.
Painful and unfortunate as the decision of the House may have been, I have come to the irresistible conclusion that every legal steps processes provided under the constitution for the appointment of a substantive or Acting chief judge was followed by both the NJC, Governor and CRSHA.
It is true that after the retirement of the former chief judge, Justice Michael Edem, His Excellency the Governor, pursant to S. 271 ( 4) appointed Justice Akon Ikpeme on the 2nd day of December 2019 as Acting CJ to forestall a vacuum from arising.
It is also true that the NJC later recommended Justice Akon Ikpeme as substantive CJ pursant to S. 271 (1) of the CFRN 1999 supra.
It is also true that the Governor in compliance with the recommendation of the NJC, immediately appointed Justice Akon Ikpeme as substantive CJ and forwarded her name to the House of Assembly for confirmation.
It is also true that the recommendation of the NJC and the subsequent appointment by the Governor could not be confirmed by the House of Assembly on the 2nd day of March which happens to be the last day of Justice Akon Ikpeme's Acting period
Faced with what could have resulted in a grievous constitutional crisis, His Excellency, the Governor acting on sound legal advice of His Attorney General and after receipt of the House resolution proceeded pursuant to S. 271 (4) supra to swear in Justice Maurice Eneji in Acting capacity on the 3rd day of March 2020 while waiting for the appointment of a substantive CJ to be recommended by the NJC.
It should be noted that unless NJC recommends Justice Eneji as substantive CJ, followed by the Governor's appointment and the House confirms him within three months, his present appointment in acting capacity will lapse and the Governor will not reappoint him unless the NJC authorizes otherwise.
This is aptly provided in S. 271( 5) supra.
The section reads:
" Except on the recommendation of the NJC, an appointment pursuant to subsection (4) of this section shall cease to have effect after the expiration of three months from the date of such appointment and the Governor shall not re appoint a person whose appointment has lapsed"
I want to appeal to my fellow citizens that we must resist the temptation to join issues and divide ourselves on ethnic and tribal lines.
Similarly, the brewing diatribe against the our sister state should pls stop for the interest of peace, love and continued co existence in amity and halcyon.
The matter at hand should be divorced from politics pls and placed on the alter of law for proper anatomy.
My answer is in the affirmative
I have done a constitutional anatomy and found out that, arguable, sad and painful as the reasons for justice Akon Ikpeme's rejection of confirmation may be to anyone, the CRSHA acted within its constitutional powers as an independent arm of Government.
It is Rule of law and nothing more
Any contrary view devoid of diatribe,
Insult, etc is welcome.
While I will appreciate the contributions of other legal minds and non legal minds (but patriotic citizens) whose contributions I intend to use to broaden my legal knowledge in this regard, I will be happy if no ethnic sentiment is expressed on my wall because I will delete same
Expounding our jurisprudence without expanding the regrettable lines of division that this has generated is to me the fundamental objective of this peice.
Let us stay with the law because it is rule of law and not ethnicity.
Alphonsus Ogar Eba esq
PP : A. O. EBA & CO Abuja
DG, DUE PROCESS, CRS
No comments:
Post a Comment