Four years after the Code of Conduct Tribunal convicted the former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter S. N. Onnoghen for breach of Code of Conduct for Public Officers and had him removed as CJN in flagrant disregard to constitutional provisions, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu last week replaced Umar with Dr Mainasara Umar Kago.

Lawyers have since described the announcement as a breach of constitutional provisions. Condemning his removal, a former Dean of the Faculty of Law at the Bayero University Kano, Prof. Mamman Lawan-Yusufari, said his removal ignored relevant provisions of the constitution which provides that the holder of that office can only leave office at 70 years. Umar is 53 years old.

In 2019, without determining whether it had jurisdiction over Justice Onnoghen as required by law, the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) headed by Danladi Umar proceeded to give an illegal order purporting to suspend the then CJN from office.

The enrolled order signed by the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), Hon. Danladi Y. Umar, and one other member of the Tribunal (Hon. Mrs. Julie A. Anabor), purported to direct Hon. Justice Onnoghen to ‘’step aside’’ as the CJN and Chairman of the NJC pending the determination of the Motion on Notice dated the 10th day of January, 2019.
On the face of the said order, the name of the legal practitioner who moved the motion ex-parte is not stated.


This is notwithstanding that the Constitution has explicitly stated the procedure for the appointment and removal of the CJN which no court, tribunal, president or other authority or person in Nigeria can derogate from, override or alter the said procedure.

On the Danladi Umar question, Prof. Lawan-Yusufari noted that the 1999 Constitution (as amended) provides that the Chairman and Members of the CCT are appointed by the President upon the recommendation of the National Judicial Council (NJC), which receives advice from the Federal Judicial Service Commission.

According to him, the constitution also stipulates that the president can only remove the chairman and members upon an address supported by a two-thirds majority of each House of the National Assembly and only on the grounds of inability to discharge functions. They must also vacate office upon attaining 70 years.

The professor stressed that the stringent provisions on appointment and removal are rooted in the sensitivity of the offices, ensuring effective public service delivery, good governance, national development, peace, and security.

On his part, Ikoro N. Ikoro, Esq remarked that  the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) is the grundnorm and its provisions prevail over every authority in Nigeria including the office of the CCT chairman.

“The constitution provides that in the removal of the CCT chairman, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria must make the announcement after an approval of 2/3 majority of both the Senate and the House of Representatives,” he said

“There is a reason for the stringent provision of the law in the removal of the CCT chairman by a president; it is because the position is sensitive and it is the body charged with checkmating illicit acquisition of wealth by officials of state.

 “There is a mandatory requirement of termination of appointment at the age of 70. He is still 53 or so years old. So age could not have been a factor. There is no doubt that there was a call for the man to be sacked after a slap incident in Abuja or how he treated the retired Onnoghen, CJN, but after that event he was not sacked. Therefore, Government is required to go through the right channels to make sure that the trust embedded in that office is maintained if he must be removed,” he added.

Likewise, E. M. D. Umukoro Esq pointed out that the provisions for the removal of the CCT chairman as provided by the constitution requires an address and two-third majorly of members of both chambers of the National Assembly adding that the chairman or members of the CCT have not violated the law, they enjoy tenure of office and cannot be removed arbitrarily.

“If the chairman or any of the members of the Code of Conduct Tribunal has been removed from office, outside the provisions of the law, he has right to seek redress under the law,” he said. Another who does not want his name in in print said: “Karma is indeed a universal donor. Umar just realized that removal from office has to be in accordance with the constitution.”

On Tuesday, 26 April 2022, Hon. Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja, ordered the Umar to appear before the Senate in a probe on the petition that he was caught fighting in public.

“If the chairman or any of the members of the Code of Conduct Tribunal has been removed from office, outside the provisions of the law, he has right to seek redress under the law,” he said.

Another who does not want his name in in print said: “Karma is indeed a universal donor. Umar just realized that removal from office has to be in accordance with the constitution.”

On Tuesday, 26 April 2022, Hon. Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja, ordered the Umar to appear before the Senate in a probe on the petition that he was caught fighting in public

Below is an illuminating article written by lawyer and public affairs analyst, Sonnie Ekwowusi in May, 2022 when the now -ex-CCT  Chair was caught on camera fighting in public in an Abuja mall.

Last week the Federal High Court, Abuja, per Justice Inyang Ekwo, ordered the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) Danladi Umar to appear before the Senate in a probe on the petition that he was caught fighting in public. Justice Ekwo issued the aforesaid order while delivering judgment in a suit filed by Umar challenging the powers of the Senate to investigate him for fighting a security guard in public.

In his suit against the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions and the Attorney-General of the Federation, the CCT  chair had prayed the court that pursuant to sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria lacks the jurisdiction to investigate him. But while delivering his judgment last week, Justice Ekwo stated that Umar had no cogent reason to stop the Senate from carrying out its constitutional functions.

The judge further said that Section 2 of the Code of Conduct Bureau Act exposed Umar to an investigation by the National Assembly. The judge held that as a public officer administering a law relating to the conduct of public officers, Umar’s disgraceful conduct should be investigated by the Senate. The Judge also said that Umar had no reason to institute the suit to stop the Senate from probing a public petition seeking justice. Holding that Umar is not above the law of the land, the Judge further stated: “As such, it will be illogical for him (Umar) to seek to stop the Senate probe as doing so will give an impression that he is above the law”.

It is surprising that Umar was shamelessly praying to the court to stop the Senate from investigating him. You will recall that on March 29 2021, the CCT  Chair Umar threw decency, dignity and decorum overboard and engaged a security guard in an open street brawl in broad daylight at the Banex Plaza, Wuse Abuja, to the astonishment of the bemused onlookers who could be heard admonishing Umar, “Go away, go away, Oga go inside your car, respect yourself. You are not the most powerful person here, they will beat you here”. The video which captured the fight made the rounds at that time. During the affray, Umar gave the security guard an upper cut which landed in his face and consequently sending the poor man landing and sprawling on the ground.

Seeing the man sprawling on the ground, a visibly-angry Umar was not done with him yet. Just as the man was regaining his composure and was about getting up from the ground, Umar, the street fighter, further sprang to his feet in the fashion of a native wrestler, swiftly ran to his car, brought out a lethal weapon and stretched his hand to use it to smash the head of the security guard but thanks to Umar’s two police escorts, driver and some good Samaritans who swiftly used their hands to block Umar from committing what would have been a murder or a homicide. At the end of the fight the security guard was rushed to the hospital for treatment. I don’t know whether Umar was also rushed to the hospital for treatment.

Following the unequivocal condemnation of Umar’s disgraceful conduct at that time by the general public, all have been expecting the National Judicial Council (NJC) to wield the big stick and fire Umar or at least suspend him from office pending the allegation against him. But unfortunately that hasn’t happened. Meanwhile Umar, in his arrogance, has not deemed it fit to apologize for his scandalous conduct. Instead of apologizing to the Bar, the Bench and the public for his disgraceful behaviour, Umar proceeded to institute a suit at the Federal High Court to pervert the course of justice. It is obvious that Umar believes that he is above the law of the land. He sees himself as an untouchable lawless leviathan. He is god. He is superior to everybody. He can do whatever he likes.

For example, during the trial of former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Walter Onnoghen, Umar announced in open court that he would not grant an ex-parte order. Strangely enough, the same Umar secretly went behind Onnoghen’s lawyers and concocted a black-market ex-parte order which President Buhari relied on in illegally removing Onnoghen as the CJN. Umar actually threatened journalists covering judicial proceedings in his court at that time that he would imprison them and they would remain in incarceration until he (Umar) retires from service after about 28 years. An ethnic profiler, Umar threatened to deal with those whom he contemptuously labels “Biafra boys”. Shocked by the ethnic profiling, a visibly-angry co-convener of Bring Back Our Girls movement Aisha Yesufu released a video in April 2021 demanding for the immediate dismissal of Umar as CCT  Chair.

I cannot agree less. By fighting in public, Umar has brought the Bar and Bench into public ridicule, public odium and opprobrium. Consequently Umar should have been removed as Chair of the CCT. It is characters such as Danladi Umar that gives the judiciary a bad name. There have been insinuations on social media to the effect that Umar must have been provoked by the security guard or that the security guard was the first aggressor and assaulter of Umar.

No matter the high level provocation or aggression, a Chairman of the CCT cannot descend to the low level of fighting in public contrary to the Code of Conduct of Judicial officers and the Judicial Oath which he swore to uphold and in fact made other judges to uphold as well. As a lawyer, Umar should have known that aggrieved persons are enjoined by the Constitution to seek remedy in a law court. Therefore if Umar had felt that the security man had wronged him he could have set the law in motion against him instead of resorting to violence. Resort to violence is a recipe for anarchy. The rule of law in contrast to the rule of force ought to reign always.

The legal profession is a conservative profession that extols decency, public decorum, social comportment as the hallmark of excellence and success in the profession. By their special vocation as unbiased empire in the dispensation of justice, judges ought to be the most disciplined officers in the temple of justice. Like Caesar’s wife, judges should not only live and behave above board but manifestly be seen to live and behave above board. Judges are honoured and revered because of their impeccable character. This is why judges could refrain from joining issues with their critics in the media and public space.

This is why judges religiously season their public utterances in public places with the ingredient of mortification. For example, Master of Rolls, Rt. Hon. A. T Denning was distinguished by both his exceptional lucidity of thought and his character. If Umar can fight in the street, what is the difference between him and the motor touts and political thugs who are always fighting in public?. If Umar can descend from his Olympian height to the low level of fighting in public, what advice will he be giving to his children and probably grandchildren? Or, what impressions will Umar’s children or grand-children have watching their father or grandfather fighting in public?

The late eminent Justice Akinola Aguda tirelessly advocated that only worthy persons should be appointed to the Bench. Aguda believed that a single error in appointing unworthy persons to the Bench could ruin the whole administration of justice. Justice Aguda was right. In most countries, only the best and the brightest are appointed judges. Not so in Nigeria. In Nigeria the most important factor that plays out in the appointment of judges is Prof. Joseph Richard’s prebendalism. This was why a  Supreme Court nominee was nevertheless appointed as a Supreme Court justice despite the fact that the man did not know the meaning of the notion “technicality in law” during the Senate screening/clearing exercise.

I agree with Aguda that only men of character should be appointed to the Bench. For descending to the low level of fighting in the street, Danladi Umar is unworthy to be the Chairman of the CCT. If Umar is the Chairman of the CCT investigating the conduct of public officers it stands to reason that he should be fired when his conduct gives us reason to believe that he is unworthy to be the  Chair of the CCT. On March 15 2010 Hon. Justice Idris Habib Shall of the Bauchi State High Court was suspended by the National Judicial Council (NJC) for fighting in public.

So, why hasn’t the NJC fired Umar or at least suspended him pending the investigation of the serious allegation against him? The function of the judiciary as a dispenser of justice or as sustainer of good governance is endangered when a Chair of the CCT who ought to conduct himself responsibly in public throws decency overboard to engage in an open street brawl.

MadamRamota:
Tinubu will be the last president of Nigeria.

seunmsg:
I think there is a court judgement that stipulates tenure for members of CCT and CCB and that’s why CCB chairman and commissioners are always changed even before they get to 70 years. CCT can’t be treated differently.