By Abdulbaasit Adams Senapon and Hope Victoria Chinaza
The Judiciary is a pivotal arm of government that has a large dependence of the public on it and as such a judicial officer who is entrusted with the highest level of trust and confidence is expected to act in strict adherence to all relevant rules and conducts in order not to cast doubt on the mind of the public of being bias, impartial or likelihood of bias.
The provisions of the rules are clear and unambiguous as to the ways and manner in which a judicial officer should behave. By virtue of the provision of Rule 1 Paragraph 1.1 of the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which provides thus:
Rules 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.”
Rules 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.
Rules 1,3
A judicial officer should respect and comply with 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.
The interpretation of the above provisions are not farfetched, which is to the effect that a judicial officer is not only obliged to avoid impropriety but also to avoid the appearance of impropriety no matter how minute. This provision can be likened to the provision of the Holy Book, where God enjoined man to abstain from the appearance of evil (I Thessalonians 5:2).
The contextual interpretation of this is to emphasis that the word “appearance of impropriety” as used above suggests the sensitivity of the act of a judicial officer and its probable consequence not only on the judicial officer, the profession but as well as the society at large.
Although, while it is safe to say that judicial officers are also members of the society who are entitled to enjoy their constitutional freedom of association, expression and liberty. However, in order to ensure that judicial officers carry out their constitutional duties effectively free from undue influence, bias or likelihood of bias, these rights in the case of judicial officers are preserved to reasonable standard.
In the recent days, the attendance of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Olatokunbo Kekere Ekun at the Dinner hosted by the Lagos State Government has raised personal and professional concerns in the populace. With these concerns, it is pertinent to ask the question whether the attendance of the CJN at the Dinner is a breach of the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The appearance of doubt as to the impropriety or otherwise of the act of the CJN alone has affirmed that the said act is improper.
By the combined effect of Rules 1.2 and 1.3 cited above, the attendance of the CJN at the dinner amounts to an appearance of impropriety which cast doubt in the mind of the public in the promotion of public confidence, integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
This discussion takes us to the realm of Bias whether the act of the CJN amounts to bias or likelihood of bias. The Court of Appeal in the case of OROGBEMI v. STATE (2022) LPELR-58201 (CA) distinguished the two concepts where it held thus:
Bias in relation to a Court or tribunal is an inclination or preparation or predisposition to decide a cause or matter in a certain pre-arranged way without regard to any law or rules. The likelihood of bias may be drawn or surmised from many factors such as corruption, partnership, personal hostility, friendship, group membership or association and so towards or involving a particular party in a case-KENON VS TEKAM (2001) 14 NWLR (Pt 732) 12, Usani Vs Duke (2006) 17 NWLR (Pt 1009) 610, Federal Republic of Nigeria Vs Abacha (2014) LPELR-22355(CA).” Per HABEEB ADEWALE OLUMUYIWA ABIRU, JCA (Pp 53 – 54 Paras B – A).
In the above cited authority it was held that a likelihood of bias may be drawn from involving a particular party. In the instant scenario, it is no doubt that the attendance of the CJN in such a dinner/party amounts to a likelihood of bias (appearance of impropriety) which is against the spirit of the Code of conduct.
Although, it is pertinent to mention that the dinner hosted in honour of the CJN which she attended is not the first of its kind as same has been similarly held prior to now. Cross River State also hosted same in Honour of the then Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter Onnoghen which did not make it to the public as it is in the current situation. However, no matter the frequency of an impropriety, it will not change its status otherwise.
A judicial officer must avoid contacts that may suggest that there exists a special relation with someone. Rule 1.4 of the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, provides thus:
“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”
In the instant situation, is it safe to say that there is a special relationship between the CJN and the Governor of Lagos State which can raise likelihood of bias as well as undue influence?. At this junction, we would like to refer to the case of AKEEM & ANOR v. FRN (2024) LPELR-62307 (CA) where it was held thus:
However, likelihood of bias may arise as a result of personal relationship, personal hostility, personal friendship, family relationship, Professional relationship vocational relationship employer/employee relationship etc. See AWHANGWU & ORS VS AWHANGWU & ORS (2016) LPELR-41158 (CA), SALIBA VS LABADEDI (1972) 72 SC132, T.M ORUGBO VS BULARA (2002) LPELR – 2778 (SC).” Per BINTA FATIMA ZUBAIRU, JCA (Pp 33 – 34 Paras D – B).
While it is a known fact that the Governor of Lagos State is not the employer of the CJN, that does not take away the fact that the attendance of CJN at the dinner has led to a speculation that there exists a special relationship between them which amounts to an appearance of impropriety.
In order to ensure clarity of purpose and maintain the sanctity of the judiciary as a whole, Rules 1.5 of the Code of Conducts of the judicial officers provides thus:
A judicial officer must avoid social relationship 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.
Conclusively by the above provision, the attendance of the CJN at the dinner organised by the Lagos State Government has aroused suspicions and doubt as to the independence, impartiality and transparency of a judicial officer. Attending this dinner is improper, questionable and a flagrant violation of the provisions of the code of conduct for judicial officers as her attendance amounts to likelihood of bias when any matter between the Lagos State and any other party arises.
Abdulbaasit and Victoria are law graduate from the Lagos state University