A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Chief Mike Ahamba has advised Nigerians not to completely lose hope in the judiciary due to alleged unethical conduct of some judges who deliver judgements without thoroughly exhausting the judicial processes and the rule of law that guarantees justice.
Chief Ahamba emphasised that no matter what happens, the judiciary still remains the last hope of the common man and pointed out that the only alternative to the rule of law was chaos, which no sane person will advocate to have as a viable replacement for peace.
The legal luminary made the remarks while commenting on the recent Supreme Court judgement, which upturned the sack of some state governors.
Chief Mike Ahamba in the telephone interview, commended the Supreme Court for summing-up courage and for putting the records straight on the matter of party membership, alleged improper nomination of candidates and the validity of congresses, pointing out that the judgement has reassured the citizens that the judiciary still remains the last hope of the people.
He advised Nigerians not to criticize or condemn the entire judiciary because of the actions of some judges stressing that the judiciary does not condone unethical practices and behaviours from members.
“I do not believe that it is right to condemn the entire judiciary as a whole for the misconduct of one judge or a group of judges. If people have sound evidence of misconduct against any judge or judges, there is nothing wrong with seeking redress at the appropriate quarters.
“We cannot develop by keeping quiet and condoning unethical behaviour or misconduct by public officers.”
Chief Ahamba said that the Supreme Court judgement will go a long way to heal wounds and restore the hope of many who had lost confidence in the conduct of some judges due to judgements delivered after the 2023 general elections.
“Whether the Supreme Court is right or wrong depends on the facts presented before the court. The issue of qualification is a pre-election matter that should not come before any court after elections. Nobody in party A can successfully challenge someone in party B because those things are internal party matters.
“It is wrong for politicians in party A to start questioning and picking holes on how another person in party B was nominated as a candidate. These issues are pre-election matters,” Ahamba stated.
Continuing, hr said: “I am happy that the Supreme Court has put the records straight and restored sanity in the system because matters of qualification are pre-election issues that should not be entertained by courts.”
On how the judgement will impact on the sagging image of the judiciary, Ahamba said that the Supreme Court acquitted itself well by balancing the judgement adding, “I do not believe that the judiciary should be destroyed publicly because of the actions of some judges. I believe that each case should be treated on its own merit and if anyone is known to have violated the Judicial Code of Conduct, such a person should be held accountable for such infractions but a blanket blame and condemnation of the judiciary over one or two person’s action is not fair.
“I believe strongly that the judiciary still remains the last hope of the common man particularly because I know that there is no better alternative. The available alternative is chaos. So, let us try as citizens to correct things wherever they go wrong for the good of the country,” he concluded.
