Elombah
Take a fresh look at your lifestyle.

Law Reform Commission Backs Supreme Court on Orji Kalu’s case

218

Nigerian Law Reform Commission ( NLRC ) has supported Supreme Court Judgement striking out 12 – year jail term slammed on Senator Orji Uzor Kalu by Justice Mohammed Idris on the 5th of December 2019 .

The Acting Chairman of the Commission , Professor Jummai Audi declared to the Senate Committee on Judiciary Human Rights and Legal Matters that the Judgement of the lower court against Orji Uzor Kalu was an absurdity on account of the Justice who completed hearing and ruled on the case.

Professor Audi who made the declaration during her screening for the substantive Chairmanship position of the Commission on Wednesday , said : “On the Orji Uzor Kalu’s case, I think it is an absurdity.

” The administration of criminal justice has to be amended because you can not say that a Judge, who by law has been appointed to a higher level should step down in order to decide a case and then caterpault himself up again to his normal position.

“We can read a lot of intention to that which is unconstitutional, undemocratic and unacceptable. Because it is not acceptable, the decision taken by that arrangement cannot stand” .

She added that since provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act ( ACJA) , relied upon for the judgement , cannot override that of the 1999 Constitution , it will have to be amended .

Virtually all the members of the committee like Senators James Manager ( PDP Delta South), Peter Nwaoboshi ( PDP Delta North) , Chukwuka Utazi ( PDP Enugu North) , Gabriel Suswam ( PDP Benue North East ) and Ibrahim Hassan Hadejia ( APC Jigawa North) , supported the submission by chorusing ” you are well guided”.

Recalled that in its reaction to the Supreme Court Judgement , the Chairman of the Presidential Advisory Committee against Corruption, Prof Itse Sagay, SAN, expressed his displeasure over Apex Court’s judgment nullifying the trial of Kalu, and others…

He said : “No section of the constitution prevented a judge, who was promoted to a higher court, from continuing to hear pending cases in the lower court.

“(But if) the National Assembly then passes a law that grants the authority to that judge, I think the Supreme Court doesn’t have the power to insist on its own interpretation by referring to the constitution, which has no such provisions”.

Comments are closed.