Although Rule 1(4) of the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria provides that: “The Judge must be sensitive to the need to avoid contacts that may lead people to speculate that there is a special relationship between him and someone whom the Judge may be tempted to favour in some way in the course of his judicial duties”, Lere Olayinka, the media aide to the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Ezenwo Nyesom Wike has lampooned Prof. Chidi Odinkalu’s condemnation of the minister’s closeness to the judiciary.
Olayinka, in a tweet that appears to endorse open association by judicial officers with politicians, said: “In USA, Supreme Court Justices are openly identified by their Conservative and Liberal political ideologies. They are associated with political parties in power when they were nominated…”
Below is RULE 1 of the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Propriety and the appearance of propriety, both professional and personal
1.1 Propriety and the appearance of propriety, both professional and personal, are essential elements of a Judge’s life. As members of the public expect a high standard of conduct from a Judge, he or she must, when in doubt about attending an event or receiving a gift, however small, ask himself or herself the question- “How might this look in the eyes of the public?”
1.2 A Judge shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of the Judge’s activities both in his professional and private life.
1.3 A Judicial Officer should respect and comply with the laws of the land and should conduct himself at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the Judiciary.
1.4 The Judge must be sensitive to the need to avoid contacts that may lead people to speculate that there is a special relationship between him and someone whom the Judge may be tempted to favour in some way in the course of his judicial duties.
1.5 A Judicial Officer must avoid social relationships that are improper or may give rise to an appearance of impropriety or that may cast doubt on the ability of a Judicial Officer to decide cases impartially.
1.6 A Judge shall not hold membership in any organization that discriminates on the basis of race, sex, religion, ethnicity, national origin or other irrelevant cause contrary to fundamental human rights and/or the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy under the Nigerian Constitution.
1.7 A Judge shall not engage in gambling as a leisure activity.
Sequel to the appointment of Hon. Justice Monica Dongban-Mensem, President of the Court of Appeal, as Chairman Board of Trustees (BoT) of the IBB International Golf and Country Club in Abuja, by the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Ezenwo Nyesom Wike, law teacher and rights lawyer, Chidi Odinkalu has called on the President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Mazi Afam Osigwe to address what he described as ” the brazen accessorization of judicial officers by @GovWike.”
Odinkalu in a series of tweets said: “The @NigBarAssoc under @afamosigwe has a duty to address the brazen accessorization of judicial officers by @GovWike, & @njcNig is failing manifestly in its duty to address the impunity of judges who violate clear provisions of the judicial Code of Conduct of 2016.”
Again, he pointed out that: “The presence of FCT Minister @GovWike & @CourtOfAppealNG president, Monica Dongban Mensem at that event in IBB Golf Club in Abuja yesterday was judicial malpractice & influence peddling. Wike knew he was not supposed to be there. There are cases in court.
This is coming on the heels of a letter to the minister by Chief Joseph K. Gadzama urging him to rescind his claims over the golf course and allow the rule of law to prevail, considering that matters concerning the affairs of the golf club are currently in court.
“As a private club since 2011, it is essential that the constitution is adhered to, particularly to resolving the current crisis and ensuring the club’s long-term success… [C]onsidering that the matter is already subjudice, it may be prudent to allow the ongoing court actions initiated by the disgruntled members to proceed unhindered, permitting the court to adjudicate on the issues and bring a definitive resolution to the dispute.”
Read Also: NBA President must address the brazen accessorization of judicial officers by @GovWike — Odinkalu
