Court Rejects Suit Alleging Marginalisation Of Judges Appointment

A Federal High Court, in Abuja, has rejected a suit alleging marginalisation with respect to the appointment of judges by the National Judicial Council (NJC) and the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC).

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Azubuike Oko, in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/205/2024, challenged the non-inclusion of lawyers from Ebonyi State among the newly appointed judges of the High Court of the FCT.

He alleged that his state had been routinely excluded and marginalised with respect to the appointment of judges of the court by Baba-Yusuf, NJC, and the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC).

The presiding judge, Justice Inyang Ekwo, held in a judgment on Friday that the plaintiff, Oko, who claimed to be a lawyer from Ebonyi, lacked the legal right to institute the matter.

Justice Ekwo also upheld the objection raised by Akinlolu Kehinde, SAN, counsel for the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Olukayode Ariwoola; the National Judicial Council (NJC), and the Chief Judge of the FCT High Court, Hussein Baba-Yusuf.

Oko claimed that it was the FCT chief judge who computed the names of qualified lawyers from selected states, which he sent to the FJSC for recommendation to the NJC for appointment by the President of Nigeria as judges of the court.

He said the states from which the new appointment was made are Bauchi, Bayelsa, Enugu, Imo, Kogi, Kwara, Lagos, Oyo, Plateau, Rivers, Taraba, and Zamfara.

He alleged that currently, Oyo and Kogi “already had two serving judges in the FCT High Court, and the two states were given additional slots, to now have three judges, despite the fact that Ebonyi State has no single serving judge in the High Court of the FCT.”

Ruling on the matter, Justice Ekwo, held that the plaintiff was not saying that he had a personal injury caused by the CJN, NJC, the Chief Judge of the FCT, or any other defendant in the case for which he sought remedy.

He said that “the plaintiff only claimed that he is from Ebonyi, which had been routinely excluded and marginalised with respect to the appointment of judges of the High Court of FCT by the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd defendants (the CJN, NJC, and the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC)).

“What the plaintiff needed to establish to demonstrate his locus standi is how the appointment being considered by the defendants has affected him as a person.

“This, he would have done, by showing that he applied to be considered by the defendants for appointment but he was ‘routinely excluded and marginalized.’

“On the other hand, he would have established that he is acting for any person or persons from Ebonyi State, who are qualified to be appointed and who have indeed applied to be considered for the said appointment, but had been ‘routinely marginalised.’

“In other words, there is no averment that the plaintiff ever applied to be considered for the appointment in issue.

“Without this, I find that the plaintiff has failed to establish his locus standi to initiate this action.”

The judge equally faulted Oko’s attempt to rely on his being from Ebonyi to establish his locus standi to institute the suit.

“The fact that the plaintiff is from Ebonyi State does not still avail him of the locus to initiate this case because, in his view, Ebonyi State of Nigeria has been routinely excluded and marginalised with respect to the appointment of judges of the High Court of FCT by the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants.

“Ebonyi State, for whose cause the plaintiff claims to undertake, is a legal entity established by the constitution with requisite corporate characteristics, including the capacity to sue and be sued for any wrong done to it by any person.

“Assuming that the plaintiff can sue on behalf of Ebonyi State of Nigeria, which according to him, has been routinely excluded and marginalised with respect to the appointment of judges of the High Court of FCT by the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants, the averment that would have established his locus beyond any conjecture would be that the case is in a representative capacity and that he has the consent and authority of Ebonyi State of Nigeria to file thes case.