Contrary to reports that former retired Justice of the Court of Appeal, Ayo Salami gave family reasons for rejecting to serve in the Presidential Corruption and Financial Crime Cases Trial Monitoring Committee, fresh facts linked to failure of the Chief Justice Of Nigeria (CJN), Walter Onnoghen to heed Salami’s advice on how to make the work of the committee workable was responsible.
Salami had written to the CJN to identify areas of conflict and doubt, seeking the understanding of Onnoghen but the CJN remained undaunted, a situation the retired Justice felt his integrity would be at stake if he decides to serve as a member of the committee.
Below is the letter Salami wrote to the CJN
“Please refer to Your Lordship’s letter Ref. No. NJC/6/4/76/1/1 of 9th October, 2017 and our (Onnoghen/Salami) discussion of Thursday, 12th October, 2017 in Your Lordship’s chambers on the above mentioned committee.
“At the meeting, I raised serious objection to the inclusion of certain legal practitioners in the committee based on their antecedents, divided interest and personal relationship with one of them whom I strongly believe I cannot work with.
“Your Lordship apparently agreed with me that their inclusion was inauspicious based on petitions or protests you had received against their membership of the committee but Your Lordship was of the view that their removal at this stage would be premature and should be deferred till after the inauguration of the committee.
“I do not agree with Your Lordship’s approach to the problem and I am respectfully not prepared to accept it as it would amount to buying a pig in a poke. It is easier to remove them before inauguration than after inauguration.”
“On my return to Ilorin on that 12th October, 2017, I met the letter under reference, which was forwarded to me by courier, waiting for me.
“The letter contained the terms of reference of the committee which is mainly to be watching the proceedings of courts designated by the chief judges across the country for trial of corruption cases.
“With the greatest respect, I do not know what we stand to gain by merely watching the proceedings of these courts. A judge who is quiet or friendly to counsel may not necessarily be honest neither is the one who is boisterous dishonest.
“Even then the most reckless amongst them would not be foolhardy to misconduct himself in the presence of the committee. He would clearly conduct himself respectfully for so long as it takes.
“I wish to remind My Lord that the devil itself does not know the darkest part of a man’s mind. Our sitting in court watching the proceedings would not disclose the intention of the presiding judge.
“The whole exercise would tantamount to time wasting and a huge theatrical show as we would not be there when he is writing his judgment.”
“I, therefore, most respectfully stand to be persuaded on what the National Judicial Council stands to gain by setting up this committee.
“If, however, it feels very strongly about it, council could make one of its members chairman of the body. There are five retired Justices of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal, including a former President of the Court of Appeal, in the National Judicial Council.
“After all the committee is that of the National Judicial Council as suggested above and I am not a member of the council. My own duty would just have been to submit a report to the council for its consideration and conclusion, a role that would be better performed by a member of the council.
“My Lord, the Chief Justice of Nigeria, another dilemma the committee might face is the inclusion of the five chief judges of some states in it. What happens to their primary function – the administration of their various courts? Would they abdicate their responsibility to their courts or be taking time off to see to the running in order to ensure their stability? What would the committee do during their absence; wait for them or proceed without them?
“Either view is not salutary to the function of the committee. If we wait for them, the work of the committee would be delayed and if we proceed without them, they would not be seized of all the facts to enable them participate fully in the deliberations of the committee and to defend its report in council.”