Nigeria no doubt is undergoing a rebirth in the fight against endemic corruption. It is a war everyone believes should not only be fought but must be won. Just as applicable in every battle field there will be some innocent casualties or collateral damages as the military will put it. The danger in this kind of war executed by civilians is that there is usually the tendency for trial by the mob. The psyche of our people has been so brutalised that we tolerate unconventional methods in the quest for justice to the people. Sometimes due process is dispensed with so long as we perceive that it will lead to our desired justice. It will be commonplace to see the howling mob like the Jews screaming 'crucify him, crucify him' and the court is expected to act like Pontius Pilate even if the accused is innocent, to lend its hand to the mob if that will appease the people that 'justice' has been seen to be done.

The likely victim of this scenario unfolding in our clime is the judicial officer. If in the event an accused charged with corruption is convicted, the populace will hail the judge as honest and a champion of the common course. If however, the contrary becomes the case, the judge becomes a villain, corrupt and anti-people. His head will be sought on a platter.

Presently in our Nigeria, litigants and counsel have jettisoned the Court of Appeal and have resorted to petition writing against judicial officers especially where it is perceived they have a bad case or will likely lose. The judicial officer is thence made to face panels after panels for judicial decisions he made. One of such victims is Justice Charles Archibong of the Federal High Court who was dismissed from office not because he was found to be corrupt rather because he took some judicial decisions that could be subject to appeal if the aggrieved party so desires. His dismissal was held as apropos by the uninformed populace. A judicial officer is not supposed to be disciplined for interpreting the law the way he understands it. The appellate court is there to void such interpretation if it is of the opinion the trial judge erred. Even in the recent gay rights case in the United States, there was a split or dissenting decision. That shows that worldwide, given similar situations, judges must differ in the way they understand the law. A judicial officer can only be punished if it is proven that he has compromised his judicial oath but not on what he perceived the law to be.

It is to the court the down trodden run to for protection. The judiciary provides shelter for the less privileged and shields them against the tyranny of the state and the powerful, yet the judicial officer is the weakest in our society. By the nature of his office, a judicial officer is estopped from defending himself before the public against vitriol and malicious attacks. The ethos of the justice delivery system is that people do not comment or give opinion on matters sub-judice lest it may tinker with the reasoning of the judicial officer. To cast aspersions on a judicial officer in his stead as a judicial officer is not only defamatory in civil but also contemptuous in criminal and could lead to jail term, however, not anymore in Nigeria. Freedom of speech guaranteed by the Constitution has been over-stretched beyond its limit.

In the wake of charges filed against the Senate president, Dr. Bukola Saraki before the Code of Conduct Tribunal, Saharareporters had reported that Justice Ahmed Mohammed of the Federal High Court, Abuja, before whom Dr. Saraki is challenging his arraignment is "a judge for hire". It went further to say that another matter against Dr. Saraki before the same judge earlier in the year was struck out at the behest of Dr. Saraki, insinuating that Dr. Saraki had 'settled' the judge. That insinuation is wicked and malicious. What Saharareporters did not tell the people and which fact is known to Saharareporters or that it ought to know is that the Attorney General of the Federation gave a Legal Opinion or Advice in that matter that Dr. Bukola Saraki has no case to answer. In such a situation, the trial must abate. A court has no powers to continue to try a case wherein the Attorney General has exercised powers vested on him by section 174 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and entered "nolle prosequi".

Saharareporters knows or ought to know that a judge does not have powers to assign matters unto himself, nor does a judge have powers to choose and pick which matter to hear. It remains the prerogative of the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court or that of a State to assign matters to judges. When so assigned, it will amount to dereliction of his judicial functions should a judge decline to hear a matter so assigned save in special circumstance where he can show that the matter affects his personal interest. Justice A. R. Mohammed could not and did not assign Dr. Saraki's matter to himself and cannot decline to hear a matter assigned to him by the Honourable Chief Judge of the Federal High Court. Saharareporters article on Justice A. R Mohammed is not only figment of its imagination but a deliberate attempt to malign and intimidate the judicial officer.

It will be pertinent to note that in that matter challenging the competence of his trial before the Code of Conduct Tribunal, Dr. Bukola Saraki had brought an ex parte application to stop the Tribunal from conducting trial. Justice A. R. Mohammed refused to grant the ex parte order, rather made an order that the other party be put on Notice. Considering the urgent nature of the matter, he then gave a date for parties to appear before him. Saharareporters then went to town impugning the integrity of the judge by stating that he tried unsuccessfully to stop the trial of Dr. Saraki at the Code of Conduct Tribunal. The judge has not made any decision in that matter up till the time of the said publication. It is within the discretion of a judge to grant ex parte orders, however Justice A. R. Mohammed did not grant the order sought.

In conclusion, Justice A. R. Mohammed is known and respected within the judicial circle as a judge with very high moral integrity. A check at the National Judicial Council and the Federal High Court in Abuja revealed that the judge is known to legal practitioners and litigants alike as a judge who does not grant ex parte orders.

-Ekemezie, a legal practitioner, wrote in from Lagos