Failed lawyers, litigants responsible for attacks against judges — Justice Tsoho

The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court of Nigeria, Justice John Tsoho, has said that failed lawyers and litigants are responsible for the recent virulent attacks against judges of the court across the country over their judgements.

He lamented that the court has been worse for the attacks on social media arising from its wide territorial and vast subject matter jurisdiction.

Speaking at the 2024 Conference of Federal High Court Judges and commencement of the new legal year on Monday in Abuja, Justice Tsoho warned those vilifying judges to desist in their own interests.

The Chief Judge, who expressed bitterness over the trend, called on the Nigeria Bar Association NBA to use the instrument of the Code of Professional Ethics to deal with the erring lawyers desecrating the temple of justice.

He said: “I am compelled to seriously deprecate the current pervading attitude of some lawyers, litigants and public commentators of launching virulent attacks in the media against judges and their decisions.

“The Federal High Court regrettably, has been worse for it, arising from its wide territorial and vast subject matter jurisdiction.

“This trend seems to have become a ready means of seeking fame, employed mostly by failed lawyers and litigants. They do not realise that the field of law and indeed adjudication, is not a pedestrian affair.

“I wish to use this rare opportunity of voicing out, which comes just once in a year, to comment at length on this canker, as it poses great danger, not only to the Nigerian Judiciary but to the Rule of Law generally.

“Firstly, we need to remind ourselves that courts of law are established by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the Supreme Law of the Land and are vested with judicial powers by Section 6 thereof.

“Similarly, judges, particularly of the Superior Courts of record, are appointed pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution and are obligated to discharge their duties in accordance with the Constitution and enabling statutes.

“Secondly, there exists the hierarchy of courts, which serves to scrutinise the adjudicatory role of the courts in ascending order. Thus, appeals lie from the High Courts to the Court of Appeal and ultimately to the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

“Consequently, litigants who are dissatisfied with decisions of lower courts are expected and indeed required to express their grievance through the appeal process.

“The right of appeal is constitutionally guaranteed, with regard to both civil and criminal litigation. The essence of this narration is to demonstrate that the legitimate manner of challenging a court decision is through the appeal process.

“If, however, a litigant genuinely and strongly feels that a judge has misconducted himself in handling the case, such litigant may then quietly make a written complaint to the National Judicial Council (NJC) for redress.

“There is hence no room in law for holding press conferences to criticise judicial decisions. The implication therefore is that those who attack decisions of judges in the press are neither lawyers nor law-abiding, but violators of law.

“It is significant to stress the point that the existence of the appeal structure itself admits of the diverse nature of opinions and thoughts in society, which could occur in the decision-making process.

“Therefore, it is not a crime that there could be concurring or divergent views of superior courts on a decision made by a judge. That our decisions are not final is a blessing. With the industry and brilliance of our judges, appeals are welcome to test the veracity and tenacity that distinguish our judges.

“However, it is very concerning that the common situation these days is that some parties, after appealing the decision of a judge, proceed to petition the NJC on the same issue.

“The question then is: Which of the steps taken does that party accord priority to? This attitude reflects nothing else but malice. Judges will not be cowed by such antics. Worse still, some discuss pending cases in the media, notwithstanding that such cases are sub-judice.

“There can also be a cultural reflection on the growing attacks against courts and judges when it is realised that a good number of judges are aged above 60 years and are hence senior citizens in their own right.

“Yet, it is mostly youths in the age bracket between 25 and 30 years that come to the public arena to heap insults on these elders, some of whom are community leaders or from royal families.

‘This is an abominable act in refined cultural settings, as traditional society approves only of the dignified reproach of elders, even where they err.

“Thus, it is easily discernible that youths who indulge in such conduct display a lack of decent cultural background. It is, therefore, by their fruits that they are known.

“A situation where the legally recognised means of challenging court decisions is being increasingly sidelined in favour of approach by mob mentality is dangerous and worrisome.

“It is more so, as those promoting it are not well-informed but act in concert with some disgruntled lawyers. It is very sad that certain lawyers, with a few senior lawyers among them, have willingly offered themselves as errand boys to some politicians to malign judges.

“They secretly seek to influence judges but hypocritically turn around to condemn judges when their clandestine overtures to judges are rebuffed. In such situations, their supposition is that the judge must have been compromised by the opponent. They merely appear sanctimonious, while levelling unfounded allegations of bribery against judges in humongous sums of money.

“None of them has ever proven such allegations, but nevertheless, they succeed in inciting the gullible society against the maligned judges. It is bad enough that they mostly use faceless media platforms to orchestrate their malicious campaigns.

“They publicly advertise their ignorance by vociferously calling for the immediate ‘sack’ of judicial officers, as if the officers are mere domestic staff. They are oblivious that the appointment of Judicial Officers has a statutory flavour and they cannot be removed unless there is a proven case of serious misconduct.

“The ugly trend must be halted, if the judiciary is to survive. This is a task for well-meaning members of the legal profession, who owe their lives to the profession.

“For the greedy and shameless renegades, however, the collapse of the legal profession itself will not make any difference, as they would readily survive by touting.

“At this juncture, we call on the Nigerian Bar Association to scrutinise its ranks and uproot the misfits, who are causing incalculable damage to the legal profession.

“We wish to further draw attention to the fact that there are extant laws that can be called in aid to check the malicious tendency. Both the Criminal Code and the Penal Code provide punishment for malicious or injurious falsehood.

“For lawyers, the Rules of Professional Conduct can apply. On the part of judges, there is a crying need to revive the exercise of the power of contempt to protect the integrity of their persons and the courts.

“Their reluctance to employ this potent weapon should not be seen as a sign of ignorance or cowardice.

“In another vein, I consider it pertinent to briefly shed light on the commonly misconstrued phrase of “bail bond.” Most people interpret the “bond” entered into as a bail condition, to mean actual payment of money. When bail is “granted in the sum of N1 million,” for instance, it does not mean that the surety is there and then expected to deposit that sum of money with the Court.

“Rather, the surety is to enter into a bond, which is a promise, an undertaking or agreement, to the effect that the person undergoing trial would consistently attend court and would not escape until the trial is concluded.

“If however, the person escapes without satisfactory explanation, the surety will be held to pay the promised money (the value of the bond) to the court.

“This is a voluntary decision by the surety; hence, unless he is trusting of the person under trial, he is not obliged to execute the bail bond.

“It is therefore a matter of ignorance or mischief to ascribe a contrary interpretation to the matter of bail bond. This explanation is meant to enlighten the misinformed so that they will refrain from unduly vilifying Judges regarding the issue of bail bonds.

“As we reflect on the achievements of this past year, I extend my sincere gratitude to the National Judicial Council and the Federal Judicial Service Commission, all under the able leadership of His Lordship, The Honourable, The Chief Justice of Nigeria, Honourable Justice K. M. O. Kekere-Ekun, for their unwavering support.

“Your commitment in ensuring the smooth operation of our Judicial system has been invaluable. We are profoundly grateful to the Bi-Cameral Committees of the National Assembly on Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters for their unflinching goodwill with regard to our budgetary interests.

“We equally appreciate the continued understanding and support in diverse ways, by the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice.

“We also express deep gratitude to critical stakeholders for their ready collaboration with us in the area of training. These include: the National Judicial Institute (NJI), The British High Commission (BHC), the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC), Nigerian Shippers Council, Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON), National Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC), Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and several others.

“Your guidance, collaboration, and dedication to the principles of Justice have enabled us to navigate challenges and make significant progress in strengthening the rule of law in our nation.

“As we navigate the challenges confronting the judiciary and the Federal High Court in particular, it is imperative that we adhere to best practices in justice delivery.

“Judges must maintain the highest standards of impartiality and fairness in all their judicial functions. Decisions must be based solely on the law and the evidence presented, without fear or favour.

“We must strive to resolve cases expeditiously while ensuring that justice is not compromised. Delays in the administration of justice erode public confidence and undermine the rule of law.

“The judiciary must be transparent and accountable in all its operations. This includes providing access to court records and information and ensuring that judicial processes are open and accessible to the public on application.

“The protection and promotion of human rights are fundamental to the administration of justice. Judges must be vigilant in safeguarding the rights of all individuals, regardless of their background or status.

“In this new legal year, I call upon all judges and staff of the Federal High Court to rededicate themselves to the pursuit of justice. Let us work together to uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary and to ensure that the Federal High Court remains a beacon of hope for all who seek justice before it.

“I also urge all stakeholders in the justice sector, including the bar, law enforcement agencies, and other agencies of government, to collaborate with us in our efforts to strengthen the wheels of justice in Nigeria.

“I am confident that with our collective commitment and dedication, the Federal High Court will continue to play a pivotal role in upholding the rule of law and promoting a just and equitable society for all Nigerians.”