His Tainted Lordship

Chuka Okoli

Justice Chuka Jideofor Okoli, Chief Judge of Anambra State comes under intense searchlight over diverse questionable acts
By Tony Egbulefu
T he people of Anambra State, Anambrarians as they call themselves, live in a state where the absurd seems happen in a continuous chain. From the state's teeming societal urchins, to the political elite, runs a common string of vice and annihilative agenda. And denouement for now, seems far as the scary contagion has brazenly seized the state's judicial administration, with a strong grab at its head-Honourable Justice Chuka Jideofor Okoli - the state's Chief Justice.

Appointed acting Chief Judge of the state in March 2002 by the former Governor Chinwoke Mbadinuju and confirmed in May, the tragedy that has befallen the Anambra State judiciary takes root in the wily ways of Justice Okoli, who first demonstrated his capacity for wangling things way back 1993. Approximately 13 years ago, Okoli came up with a curious sworn declaration of age, purportedly sworn in the High Court of Lagos State, that altered his date of birth from June 15, 1937 to June 15 1942, which has today, enabled him to stay beyond the constitutionally mandatory retirement age of 65 for judges. Born in Dogonu Village, Otolo Nneni, in Nnewi North Local Government, one Isaac Ekejekwu Udechukwu of No 10 Akanbi Danmola Street, Ikoyi, South-west Lagos, had in an absurd document, passed off as Okoli's age declaration, sworn in the said court that he was Okoli's uncle and “resident at Nneni at the time of his birth (Okoli's)”. And as such, Udechu kwu deposed that he was “familiar with the date and all the events that took place at his Okoli's birth.” Udechukwu deposed that there was no birth registry at Nnewi when Okoli was born, hence his birth was not registered. The declaration was made by virtue of the Oaths Law of 1973, allegedly on May 25, 1993 before a notary Public/Commissioner of Oaths.

The document, however reeks with confusion:
• There is no stamp or official seal of the notary public that allegedly notorised the document.
• The document bears no name or address of the notary public
• There is confusion as to whether the document was filed in the High Court of Lagos State or the notary public.
• And if it was filed in the High Court of Lagos State, it is was silent on where the court was holden in Lagos and the country to which Lagos belongs as legalese demands.

Aside these unresolved issues, impeccable records available to The Source magazine, establish effectively that Okoli had conscientiously on his own, supplied “The Honourable Society of the Middle Temple” and the “Council of Legal Education,” Nigerian Law School Headquarters, which are organisations to which he is a member on September 12, 2003 and September 22, 2003, respectively that he was born June 15, 1937. Telling is the fact that Okoli furnished these two bodies with this date 10 years after the sworn declaration of age. Also compelling is that this date supplied by him is the one that is congruent with his birth record at the law School. At the point he supplied this data, he was also known and addressed as Chuka Joseph Okoli, which tallies with the name, with which he enrolled in school and graduated as law student and called to bar on July 9, 1963. The uncertainty that shrouds the change of Justice Okoli's middle name from Joseph to Jideofor is just one of mysteries in the Justice Okoli's peeckaboo in the Nigeria Judiciary. Officially addressed as Justice C.J. Okoli, many have wondered if he oftentimes, uses Joseph and Jideofor interchangeably. This puzzule is heightened by the fact that there is no manifest record of any change of name, undertaken at any point in time by Justice Okoli. At what point therefore, did the Anambra Chief Judge officially substituted Jideofor for Joseph? People ask.

The manifest perfidies in Okoli's magicking with his age and name, had since 2004, drawn the ire of members of Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Onitsha branch, who are peeved that Justice Okoli, who statutorily would have retired on June 15, 2002 is still around, superintending the state's judiciary via a despicable manipulation of his date of birth. In an angry letter, dated February 12, 2004 to the Executive Secretary of National Judicial Council Abuja, signed by Chuka Obele Chuka and Pete Obiorah, chairman and Secretary of NBA, Onitsha branch respectively, the lawyers noted that, “the Anambra State Judiciary has come under immense public opprobrium over the continued stay in office of the Honourable Chief Judge, C.J. Okoli.” The branch observed that Okoli attained the mandatory retirement age of 65 on June 15, 2002, a fact which the branch said was equally well known to the NJC, and upon which the council had deliberated and taken a decision that Okoli should proceed on retirement.

As anger boiled over within the Anambra judiciary with anti-Okoli protests, it climaxed with the shutting down of the state's judiciary by the judicial workers, on February 10, 2004, in an effort to force Okoli out. To restore the image of the state's judiciary and “sanctity of the judiciary and the Bench,” the Onitsha branch demanded that the NJC confirmed its recommendation for an Okoli exit.

By March 25, 2004, the Onitsha branch, followed up with another protest letter, this time to the National Security Adviser (then Aliyu Gusau) titled: “Re-Falsification of Age by Hon. Justice J. C. Okoli, the Chief Judge of Anambra State.” The protest letter informed Gusau of the dilemma of the members of Anambra State judiciary over Okoli's wily ways and the fact that he had over-stayed his welcome. The lawyers ostensibly, was pushed this far by the hem and haw, with which the NJC has handled Okoli's over stay. Signed by Obele-Chuka and Nnabuenyi Balonwu, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and Leader of the bar in state, the Onitsha branch, told Gusau that it was their wish to put him on notice over the issue of “falsification of age by Hon. J.C. Okoli, which has enabled him stay beyond the constitutionally mandatory, retirement age of 65 years.” The lawyers informed the NSA that they had petitioned the National Judicial Council over the issue and complained that “they seem not to have done anything.” The branch feared that Okoli's over stay could elicit dire consequences that could disarray justice administration in Anambra state. “We have no doubt in our mind that the continued stay in office by the Hon. C.J. Okoli, has the capacity of destablising the Nigerian State. The effect of setting aside, of all judicial acts he has performed since July, 2002 is better imagined with the following sampler: all proceedings, rulings, orders and judgements, delivered from July 2002 to date, being set aside for want of jurisdiction. One does not require a crystal ball to foresee the cataclysmic impact such scenario would have on the system,” the letter said. Furthermore, the branch implored on Gusau to investigate Okoli's age, which it said, he mutilated through paid agents. This allegation, the branch said, “should be investigated by your office, with a view to recommending the prosecution of those responsible for the crime.”

The same March 2004, the Onitsha branch of NBA, sent two additional letters, one to the NJC, calling for Okoli's immediate removal from office and another to President Obasanjo, intimating the President on Okoli's age falsification. This letter to NJC was evidently the third by lawyers in Anambra State, in their effort to exit Okoli. They reminded the NJC that the matter of Okoli's over-stay, had equally been determined in the matter of Anambra State of Nigeria and Anor Vs The Federal Republic of Nigeria and 36 Ords, with suit No.Sc/3/2004, in which the defendant, the Federal Republic of Nigeria in its statement of defence, subscribed entirely, to the fact Justice Okoli, ought to have ceased to hold office as Chief Judge of Anambra State on June 15, 2002, in tandem with the provisions of section 291(2) of the 1999 Constitution, and that all his acts later than June 15, 2002 are unconstitutional, equal to nullity and of no consequence.

As the lawyers informed the NJC, “it is no longer in contention that Hon. Justice C.J, Okoli ought to have retired on June 15, 2002." This, they said, was "ascertained by the Federal Republic of Nigeria as shown in its statement of defence in the aforementioned suit.” Arising from the FGN's statement of defence, the Onitsha branch, NBA, questioned the NJC on what Okoli was still doing on the bench, as well as the validity of Okoli's continued membership of the NJC.

On the side of the President, they urged Obasanjo to cause a criminal investigation of Okoli by the Inspector General of Police (IGP) to ascertain his complicity in the crimes and possibly that of any other person in the “falsification/mutilation (of his age and Law School records) with a view to arraigning any person, including the Chief Judge, if found culpable of any offense in court of law.” Despite the avalanche of petitions, outcry and the criminal imports of Justice Okoli's actions, neither the NJC nor Federal Government authorities have raised a finger against him. And this is understandable, Okoli tied everybody's hands way back in 2004. To achieve this, the Chief Judge curiously turned a situation that was meant to consume him into his own battle axe. The build up to this began on November 20, 2003, when an angry Barrister Onyechi Araka filed an action with suit No. 0/673/03 in the High Court of Anambra State of Nigeria, holden at Onitsha, seeking an injunction of the court, “restraining the CJ from performing the functions of the Chief Judge of Anambra State or purporting to act in any capacity whatsoever as the state's CJ.” Joined as defendants were the NJC and Anambra State Judicial Service Commission. Other reliefs sought, were a declaration that Okoli attained the mandatory retirement age of 65 years on June 15, 2002, and an order, directing the NJC to “immediately and compulsorily” retire Okoli “on the grounds that he attained the age of 65 years on June 15, 2002."

To run rings around Araka, Okoli used his immense powers and transferred the case from Onitsha to Awka High Court and to a judge of his choice. Certain that he had cornered Araka, he boasted that the matter would linger until the case file gathers dust in Awka High Court. It served Okoli's purpose for the matter to remain indefinitely subjudice. While subjudice, neither the NJC nor any other authority with respect for judicial processes would want to bother with any extra judicial pressures to exit the Chief Judge.

Araka read the writing on the wall and discontinued with the case on January 19, 2004. His discontinuance was duely communicated to Okoli and his co-defendants, but the guile in the CJ came in handy and he made the most even out of the Araka discontinuance. Discountenancing the notice of discontinuance, the CJ proceeded to file his statement of defence and counter claim, and with no Araka to contend with him, he ingeniously contrived the emergence of another plaintiff who sued him on his matter with Araka. Upon this putatively fresh suit, Okoli filed his statement of defence, and the matter became subjudice. As it were, Okoli later obtained a judgement, which upheld the lowering of his date of birth from June 15, 1937 to June 15, 1942. Upon this judgement, NJC told the hard fighting Anambra State lawyers that its hands have effectively been tied. But the undaunted Onitsha NBA, proceeded with the battle, this time pressing its case with Dr. Chris Ngige, the ousted governor of the state, whom the lawyers pressed to cause the state House of Assembly to pass a resolution, removing the CJ. With Ngige also, they met a brick wall.

Having consolidated himself on the position, Okoli began a reign of fraud, corruption and abuse of processes in the state's judiciary, riding roughshod and emasculating any figure that refuses to be muscled into line. Okoli's chief casualty at the moment is Barrister Nneka Adi-Mbonu, Chief Registrar, Anambra State High Court, who on April 21 this year, was chased out of office by the protocol officer and the deputy-registrar I, following orders from Okoli. To ensure that Adi-Mbonu would not re-enter her office any longer after the humiliation, the door was locked with a new padlock upon her forcible eviction that day. Earlier, on April 20, Okoli had pulled strings within the state's Judicial Service Commission (JSC) that saw to the Chief Registrars interdiction. In a memo with reference NO: J/S:5/TI/01 copied to all registeries in the state, M.N.O. Okonkwo, a Magistrate, who is Okoli's replacement for Adi-Mbonu, (Okonkwo is now in acting capacity), notified all court registries in the state that he had a directive to notify them of Adi-Mbonu's interdiction by the JSC, following which, no dealings whatsoever should henceforth be done with Adi-Mbonu. Okonkwo: “I am directed to notify you that the JSC has placed the Chief Registrar, N.N. Adi-Mbonu Esq. (Mrs) on interdiction with effect from Wednesday April 19, 2006. You are advised in your own interest to stop all forms of official dealings with the said N.N. Adi-Mbonu, Esq. (Mrs). For the avoidance of doubt, any staff of the judiciary that releases any document, file or official information to her, does so at his/her own peril. Please, comply strictly with the above instruction.” The greater shock however is that following the constitutional flaws in the Okoli constitution of the JSC, that interdicted Adi-Mbonu, she had on March 9, 2006 headed for the High Court of Anambra State of Nigeria, holden at Ogidi, and the following day, March 10, 2006, got an order of stay of action from the High Court on members of the Okoli constituted JSC, namely: Barrister S.C. Obi, Barrister George Igbokwe and Barrister H. Odikpo; and the Chief Judge himself. The court also made an order for the upholding of Adi-Mbonu's fundamental human rights, violated by Okoli and the deputy registrat I, by reason of her lock-out from her office. The stay of action was to last pending the determination of the substantive suit.

But without a vacation of this order, the JSC proceeded and interdicted the Chief Registrar on April 20. Her interdiction, which discountenanced the court injunction, was an added tragedy to her banishment from her office. Worse was that following the reliefs Adi-Mbonu got from the High Court in Ogidi, Okoli promptly transferred the matter to another court. Sensing the game of the Chief Judge, the Chief Registrar headed for an Appeal Court, which denounced the premature transfer of the case to another court by the CJ and ordered stay of proceeding on the matter in the new court. Remarkably, Okoli had observed the law in breach, when he constituted the JSC, which had three member legal practitioners. Part II, Third Schedule of the 1999 Constitution stipulates that only two qualified legal practitioners shall be members, while two other non legal practioners shall also be part of the commission. But the greater worry at the moment is that Okoli in league with the JSC, have retired the Chief Registrar in utter disregard of the court order, restraining them from taking further action against Adi-Mbonu.

The trouble between Adi-Mbonu and Okoli began over matters of due process. Through a “Special Order” on October 18, 2005, Okoli had set up a five-member Judiciary Tenders Board, with Honourable Justice F.C. Nwizu as its chairman. This was in gross violation of the provision of Code of Conduct for judicial officers in the country, which precludes judicial officers from being members of tenders board or engage in the award of contracts. Other members of the board were the Chief Registrar, Barrister U.C. Ajakor, Dr. Rosemary Okoye (Chief Magistrate), and Barrister F.C. Molokwu. According to the sixth item on the administrative duties of judicial officers as stipulated in the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, “a judicial officer shall not be a member of a tenders board or engage in the award of contracts.”

The composition of the flawed tenders Board again violated Circular NO. SSG/ECA/177/33, dated April 1, 2004, issued by the Secretary of the State Government then, Alex Chukwurah, which demanded that the chairman of tenders board in the ministry, bureaux and non-ministerial departments “shall be the most senior head of department, below the commissioner. In the ministry or non-ministerial department, this shall be the permanent Secretary.” In the case of the judiciary, the lot fell on the Chief Registrar, and follows according to the government's circular that its members shall be the judicial head of administration, finance and planning and three other heads of department, while the chief Registrar would issue the board's secretary, if there were to be a tenders board in the state judiciary or semblance of it.

Adi-Mbonu protested this high-noon robbery with the Chief Judge in a memo on October 19, 2005, with ref No. J/S./68/11/5, and titled “Re: Setting up of State Judiciary Tenders Board.” In her protest memo, she drew the attention of Okoli to the illuminating circular of the SSG on April 1, 2004, which stipulated the composition of a judicial tenders board, and reminded Okoli that “in view of the fact that proposed contracts will be executed with state government fund, and being public servants, it becomes necessary to comply with rules, regulating such transactions in force in the state, to avoid liabilities in beach of code of conduct.” The Chief Registrar also reminded the Chief Judge that, “in view of the fact that due process has been embraced by the state government with an office, with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, watching, may your Lordship be urged to consider the said “Special Order”, with respect to its constitution. May it please Your Lordship to consider the code of conduct with respect to judicial officers and membership of tenders board.” She observed that judicial officers should be insulated from liabilities under the judicial officers code of conduct. Adi-Mbonu, guided Okoli that the board ought to have been consisted of the heads of administration, finance, planning , head of probate registry and head of library. The chairman she said ought to have been the Chief Registrar (High Court), in the person of herself as the “over-all head of administration.”

Consequent upon these Adi-Mbonu clarifications, Justice Nwizu resigned his chair of the board, saying he was not going to be part of an illegality. Okoli then issued another “Special Order”, dated October 25, 2005, in which he set up the tenders board again, this time, without a chairman. He substituted O.E. Maduka, deputy Chief Registrar for Justice Nwizu, the boards previous chairman and stipulated that “members present at any meeting shall appoint one of their member to be chairman. This his latest action did not redeem neither the CJ's breach of the state's due process nor that of judicial code of conduct and also did nothing to accord Adi-Mbonu, her deserved due in the scheme of things.

Okoli added to his recklessness on November 29, 2005, when he awarded an N89 million contract to Armstrong Gallery Limited for the construction of High Court Complex for Anambra South Senatorial Zone, after a recommendation was made for such project by the controversial judicial tenders board. But knowing that the contract sum far exceeded his bounds, Okoli decided to save his skin by asking the Chief Registrar to sign “for and on behalf of the state judiciary,” in his memo to the Chief Registrar, dated November 28, 2005, titled “Agreement for the construction of High Court Building Complex.” The state's regulation on tenders procedure and award of contracts as it affects ministerial/departmental tenders board, stipulates that the board could only handle contracts “not below N500,000, but not exceeding two million naira.” It clarifies that “any contract the value of which exceeds N30 million, shall be approved by the state Executive Council, after deliberations by the state tenders board.”

Despite the fact that the multi-million naira project sailed through in breach of this regulation, Okoli knew that this action may one day boomerang. To play safe, he, on January 18, this year, in a memo to the Chief Registrar, “ordered that the building contract be executed on behalf of the state judiciary by the Chief Registrar.”

What is instructive is that Adi-Mbonu, who saw treachery and a time-bomb in the contract award and execution, elected to keep her distance from matters of the N89 million contract, declining even the Chief Judge's earlier order for her to endorse the contract on behalf of the state judiciary. Adi-Mbonu, had skipped her endorsement of the contract on the day of the award by honouring an invitation at Abuja for the collection of the draft for that month's (November) allocation from the National Judicial Institute. But Okoli, who was intent on tying the contract to her, did not counter-sign after the contractor had signed. He kept the space waiting for Adi-Mbonu's return. But upon her return, her disposition was still that of a preference to watch the award and execution of the contract from a distance. This drew venom from the Chief Judge, who expressed his frustration over Adi-Mbonu's less than keen disposition to the matters of the contract in a memo. But the Chief Registrar it seemed, had ready answers for the Chief Judge's worries. In a memo, she sent to the Chief Judge in response to a second instruction for her to counter-sign the contract papers, the Chief Registrar observed as follows: “My Lord, recall that you informed me that the contractor had signed his own part in my absence. As it stands, I do not know who the contractor is, neither do I know the firm to which the contract was awarded.. My Lord, you added that if at the end, the Chief Registrar refused to sign the contract agreement, some other person will sign for her. Considering the gravity of your Lordship's allegation of sabotage against the Chief Registrar, I joined the committee (Works Committee, set up by the Chief Judge) on what was to be the first sitting. When I realised that the committee was going beyond its expected scope, and was actually going into award of contract, My Lord, I met you in your chambers and made my observation known to Your Lordship. Having returned to the venue of the meeting I addressed the members that I would prefer not to be associated, for the reasons slated herein, before. I actually demanded that it be taken down into the minutes by the secretary, DCR Planning. Your Lordship made a subsequent “Special Order,” naming the committee “tenders board,” without a chairman. With all these complications, I deemed it better to stay away, having made my decision known. That when by Your Lordship's special order, setting up a tenders board for the state judiciary was made, I did a memo to Your Lordship, referring you to the operative circular No.SSG/ECA/177/33, rooted on financial regulations and also relevant portion of code of conduct for judicial officers. Hon. Justice F.C. Nwizu resigned his appointment a chairman of the board upon sighting the provision, preventing honourable judges from being members of tenders boards.

“Secondly, I as Chief Registrar, pointed out that the composition vide the said “Special Order, was at variance with the provisions of the said financial regulations. I submitted a proposal as the rules demand for Your Lordship's consideration. Recall that this was disregarded....In conclusion, I maintain that even as a member (tenders board) there should be a report, which should be availed to me to sign and which should be submitted to you. My Lord, may I plead that in compelling me to sign the document under the circumstance that I be so directed, vide Your Lordship's Special Order, this will surely protect me from doing what I am not convinced about.”

Despite these protestations, the contract agreement was all the same, entered between the Chief Registrar, who was referred as the “employer” on behalf of Anambra State judiciary and Armstrong Gallery Limited, on March 30, this year, without the Chief Registrar's consent. But she stood her ground and never endorsed the contract papers even though her signature appeared on the dotted lines for the “employer”. How the Chief Judge wanged the Chief Registrar's signature has remained a mystery.

Before the muscling of Adi-Mbonu out of office, her interdiction and subsequent alleged compulsory retirement, Okoli had turned her a passenger in the state judiciary. By a “special Order” dated February 28, this year, the Chief Judge elbowed the Chief Registrar to the fringe in the operation of state judiciary bank account. Okoli, brought in two deputy chief registrars as signatories to the account, with an amendment that either of them or the Chief Registrar can from then counter-sign for cash movement in the account. This grossly conflicts with the “Self Accounting Law, cap. 136, Laws of Anambra state, 1991, which vests the status of accounting officer of the state judiciary solely on the Chief Registrar. Following this strange turn of events, it was the deputy chief resgistrar I, that Okoli directed on February 28 to make an installment payment to Armstrong Gallery Limited. The instalment, translated to N8,225,503. Okoli's instruction which empowered the deputy Chief Registrar to effect the payment, is also in clear violation of the Federal Government's financial regulation, issued by President Obasanjo, which stipulates that "only an Accounting officer, is responsible for stewardship that is safeguarding of public funds and the regularity and propriety of the expenditure under his control.”

Obele-Chuka, in his reaction to The Source over the malaise in Anambra State judiciary, observed that “allegations of malfeasance and abuses of office against the Chief Judge, have been flying around as far back as the year 2002.” On this score, he submitted that “there is need for an urgent and thorough investigation.” It is only by such investigation he said, “that we will know the truth of these allegations." The Onitsha NBA chairman said he would have "no qualms to support the prosecution of any person against whom a prima facie case of any sort of malfeasance and abuse of office has been established in the matters.”