Front Pix
Justice Agumagu Remains Rivers CJ – RVHA
The Rivers State House of Assembly has affirmed that the State government did not contravene any law in forwarding the name of former acting Chief Judge, Justice Peter Agumagu for approval as substantive CJ.
Chairman of the Assembly’s Committee on the |Judiciary, Hon. Golden Chioma made the clarification on a Radio Rivers phone-in programme broadcast live in Port Harcourt, yesterday.
Hon. Chioma averred that it is the constitutional right of Governor Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi to appoint a Chief Judge upon receiving recommendation from the National Judicial Council (NJC), and forward such nominee to the State Assembly for approval.
According to him, “Governor Amaechi is not bound to accept such NJC recommendation, hook,line and sinker’, adding that the basic qualification of a Chief Judge is 10 years practice experience in the bar.
Chioma described as unconstitutional, null and void, the assigning of administrative functions of the High Court to Justice Daisy Okocha, after failing to arm-twist the Rivers State government to appoint her as Chief Judge.
The law-maker explained that anytime a constitutional provision becomes a subject of dual contentions, the germane thing to do is to seek legal interpretation.
That, he said, informed the Rivers State government’s resolve to seek clarification on the issue, in the Federal High Court presided over by Justice Lambo Akambe.
He said it was the learned Judge’s position that while the NJC has the constitutional power to recommend the nominees for the position of CJ to the Governor, such recommendations are not sacrosanct, as the Governor also has the right to accept or reject same.
Hon. Chioma insisted that the NJC’s recourse to suspending Justice Agumagu was unknown to law, and insisted that Governor Amaechi has the backing of the 1999 Constitution as amended to forward his choice to the Assembly for approval, which the Assembly gave.
Answering a caller’s question, the Assembly’s House Committee Chairman on the Judiciary, said the House committed no offence in passing speedily, the amendment to the High Court law 2001.
“If I buy a car and decide to drive 75 kilometres per hour on the express way, instead of 30 kmh, will I be committing any offence?” he queried.
He explained that the urgency of the situation required urgent action, and denied insinuations that the law-makers have become rubber stamp of the Executive arm.