Lawyers criticize CJN’s role as chairman of the NJC and the FJSC

Lawyers have raised concerns over the dual role of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Olukayode Ariwoola, who chairs both the National Judicial Commission and the Federal Judicial Service Commission.

The lawyers condemned the hegemonic power of the CJN, with the NJC automatically led by the CJN.

The NJC is a body responsible for disciplining judicial officials who fail in their conduct, while the FJSC is the body that initially reviews proposals or lists of candidates based on appointment to judicial office.

Also, justice sector stakeholders who attended the 2024 National Justice Summit convened by the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), held on Wednesday and Thursday at the National Judicial Institute, Abuja, reached resolutions to to submit the ongoing constitutional revision process to the National Assembly.

Speaking to the media on Friday in Abuja on the outcome of the summit, which was attended by judges and lawyers, Dr. Babatunde Ajibade (SAN) said the summit contained some far-reaching measures on the reform of the justice system in the country.

He said: “Concerns were raised that the Chief Justice of Nigeria, who is Chairman of the NJC, is also Chairman of the Federal Judicial Service Commission, the body that primarily reviews proposals or lists of candidates through appointment to judicial office.

“The members (of the panel) pointed out the apparent inconsistency between the Chief Justice of Nigeria playing both roles as it appears that he then recommended candidates to himself as he was chairman of both bodies and was the person who appoints a key official . number of members of both bodies, with the exception of those who are statutory members.

“There was a consensus that there is a need for codification of the judicial appointment process so that the discretion currently observed in the appointment process is reduced to the bare minimum.”

The role of the State Judicial Service Commission and the dire need for reforms in the discharge of their duties were also discussed.

“On the fact that the current NJC Guidelines may have undermined the intent of the constitutional provision giving the State Judicial Service Commissions the power to make judicial appointments because the NJC Guidelines, rather than the State Judicial Service Commissions to draw up a shortlist of potential candidates for judicial appointments would appear to place this responsibility solely on the President.

“And the chairmen of the State Judicial Service Commissions are the chief judges of the states. So there was a sharp suggestion that in the short term, even before we get to constitutional amendments, with regard to the composition of State Judicial Services Commissions, a low-hanging fruit that can be addressed immediately is an amendment to that aspect of the Constitution. NJC guidelines to clarify that the development or preparation of a shortlist of candidates for judicial appointments is something to be done by the Commissions as a whole and not just by the Chief Judges,” he added.

Ajibade also disclosed that a decision has been reached on the need to reduce the number of cases reaching the Supreme Court to reduce the workload of the court.

In Nigeria, apart from petitions for the parliamentary and National Assembly elections which end up in the Court of Appeal, other cases such as burglary, theft and more are dealt with in the Supreme Court.

“It is important to limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and ensure that cases that would go to the Supreme Court are only matters of significant national importance.

“And even then it would only be with the permission of the Supreme Court. “The automatic right of appeal to the Supreme Court will be severely curtailed and will be limited only to matters relating to the office and election to the office of President of the Federation, Vice President and Governors of the States,” he added to it.