National Judicial Council V. Hon. Justice Ya’u Ibrahim Dakwang & Ors (2019)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

KUMAI BAYANG AKA’AHS, J.S.C.

The 1st respondent in this appeal was the Plaintiff in the Federal High Court, Jos Judicial Division in Suit No. FHC/J/CS/7/2007. He was a Judge of the High Court of Plateau State at all material times sitting in High Court No. 6.

Sometimes in 2006, the Governor of Plateau State, Chief Joshua Chibi Dariye was purportedly impeached and removed from office. Following the furore generated by the impeachment saga which also led to the removal of the Chief Judge, Hon. Justice Lazarus Dakyen (of blessed memory) and the appointment of the 1st respondent as Acting Chief Judge by the Governor the appellant (herein) pursuant to the powers vested in it under Paragraph 21 (d) of the Third Schedule of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), set up a sub-committee at its meeting of 5 December, 2006 to look into the impeachment saga, and inquire whether the judicial officers involved had misconducted themselves. At the end of the investigation, the National Judicial Council (NJC) found that the 1st respondent was guilty of misconduct.

1

It suspended him from office and subsequently recommended that he be compulsorily retired.

The Plaintiff (now 1st respondent) aggrieved by the decision to remove him from office as a Judge filed the suit before the Federal High Court challenging his suspension and removal from office. Pleadings were filed and exchanged.

In paragraph 21 of the Statement of Claim the Plaintiff averred thus:-

“21. At the meeting of the 1st defendant on 20/12/2006 no decision was taken regarding the removal of the plaintiff from office and no recommendation to that effect was made by the 1st defendant to the 2nd defendant” (See page 8 of the record).

In answer to the said averment the 1st defendant pleaded in paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Statement of Defence:-

“8. The 1st Defendant states that at its meeting of 20th December, it considered amongst other things the report of its Committee and after extensive deliberation the 1st Defendant decided that the Plaintiff ought to be retired for unconstitutionally assuming the post of Acting Chief Judge of Plateau State, which action in the opinion of the 1st Defendant amounts to misconduct. The 1st Defendant shall

2

rely on the extract of the minutes of its meeting of December, 2006.

9. The 1st Defendant states that in consequence, it ordered the suspension of the Plaintiff and recommended to the 2nd Defendant the retirement of the Plaintiff from his office as a High Court Judge”. (See page 68 of the record).

The Plaintiff in reaction to the averments of the 1st Defendant filed a reply and stated in paragraph 2 thereof-

“2. As to paragraphs 8, 9 and 11 of the 1st Defendant’s Statement of Defence, the Plaintiff avers that the 1st Defendant did not recommend to the 2nd Defendant his retirement from office as a High Court Judge”.