Opinion
An Endless Wait For The Jurist?
There are several issues about the Nigerian Constitution which remain unclear or controversial to both lawyers and laymen alike, but the constitutional procedure for the appointment of Chief Justice of the Federation is not one of them.
The tenure of a Chief Justice of Nigeria automatically terminates upon attaining 70 years. Then the National Judicial Council (NJC) will nominate the next candidate for the position, who is usually the most senior justice on the Supreme Court bench and forward same to the president.
Barring any impediments, the president will send the nominee’s name to the Senate for confirmation. Upon confirmation of the nominee by the Senate, the president will then administer the oath of office and the Chief Judge formally assumes duties. This is usually done few days to the exit of the incumbent.
For instance, the NJC knew Justice Dahiru Musdapher, a former Chief Justice of Nigeria’s tenure would expire on July 15, 2012, and forwarded the name of Justice Aloma Mukhtar to then President Goodluck Jonathan. President Jonathan sent her name to the Senate for confirmation on July 4, 2012. And on July 11, 2012, the Senate confirmed her as the CJN.
The same process occurred when Chief Justice Mukhtar’s tenure drew to a close. The NJC sent the name of the immediate past Chief Judge, Mahmoud Mohammed, to President Jonathan. The Senate confirmed the nominee, and when his immediate predecessor was leaving office, there was no vacuum.
This has been the procedure; well laid out and seamless. But the tradition seems to have been broken when at the expiration of Mohammed’s tenure, the NJC did what was traditional by nominating the most senior judge who happens to be Justice Walter Onnoghen.
But surprisingly, the president, rather than forward his name to the Senate for confirmation, chose to appoint him Acting Chief Justice. For the avoidance of doubt, Justice Onnoghen’s name was forwarded to President Buhari on October 13, 2016; four weeks before the expiration of Mohammed’s tenure. Taken from that date, it is now 90 days when the president received Onnoghen’s nomination.
By February 10th, 2016, Onnoghen will be three months in office in acting capacity. Going by the Constitution, his role in that office may cease pursuant to section 231 (5). That section reads:
“Except on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council, an appointment pursuant to the provisions of subsection (4) of this section shall cease to have effect after the expiration of three months from the date of such appointment, and the President shall not re-appoint a person whose appointment has lapsed.” It is clear that Onnoghen’s tenure can only be extended upon the recommendation of the NJC.
I cannot remember whether an Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria was ever appointed in the recent past to head the institution. If there was, it must have been several decades ago. The reason is that the constitutional provisions for the appointment of a CJN is very explicit and devoid of ambiquities. The Constitution says that while it is the duty of the NJC to nominate, the president is to forward same to the Senate for confirmation.
The delay in confirming Onnoghen is already arousing curiosities in many Nigerians and sending wrong signals. The position of CJN should not be seen to be monopolised by a section of the country. That is why it is reasonable to expect the president to act very fast to ensure that there is credibility and stability in the third arm of government which he has a responsibility to appoint its head.
The last time someone from the southern part of the country occupied this position was in 1985-1987 when Justice Ayo Gabriel Irikefe was in charge. After him, the baton has moved from one Northerner to the other with little prospects of a southerner occupying the office on a substantive basis.
Justice Mohammed Bello took over from Irikefe and held on to the position till 1995 when Justice Muhammadu Lawal Uwais assumed the office. He retired in 2006. Justice Salihu Modibbo Alfa then came on board. Others who served in that position were: Justice Idris Legbo Kutigi, Justice Aloysius Iyorgyer Katsina-Alu, Justice Aloma Mariam Mukhtar and Justice Mohammed Mahmoud.
The president shouldn’t turn a simple and transparent procedure for appointing a CJN into a complicated one by the unwarranted delay in confirming the Acting CJN. It was for this reason the Ekiti State governor, Mr. Ayodele Fayose, suspected a grand plot to deprive Onnoghen his well deserved appointment as the substantive CJN.
The message is clear that the appointment of Justice Onnoghen in acting capacity without a precedent is simply strange and suspicious. At this time that the nation is experiencing stress and hard time, nothing should be done to threaten our fragile unity. The president needs wisdom to avert this needless controversy.
I, therefore, urge President Buhari to act rightly by forwarding the name of Justice Onnoghen to the Senate for confirmation in the spirit of fairness and equity. Let him be given the opportunity to serve like his predecessors.
Arnold Alalibo
From all indications, Nigeria possesses enough human and material resources to become a true economic powerhouse in Africa. According to the National Population Commission (NPC, 2023), the country’s population has grown steadily within the last decade, presently standing at about 220 million people—mostly young, vibrant, and innovative. Nigeria also remains the sixth-largest oil producer in the world, with enormous reserves of gas, fertile agricultural land, and human capital.
Yet, despite this enormous potential, the country continues to grapple with underdevelopment, poverty, unemployment, and insecurity. Recent data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS, 2023) show that about 129 million Nigerians currently live below the poverty line. Most families can no longer afford basic necessities, even as the government continues to project a rosy economic picture.
The Subsidy Question
The removal of fuel subsidy in 2023 by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has been one of the most controversial policy decisions in Nigeria’s recent history. According to the president, subsidy removal was designed to reduce fiscal burden, unify the foreign exchange rate, attract investment, curb inflation, and discourage excessive government borrowing.
While these objectives are theoretically sound, the reality for ordinary Nigerians has been severe hardship. Fuel prices more than tripled, transportation costs surged, and food inflation—already high—rose above 30% (NBS, 2023). The World Bank (2023) estimates that an additional 7.1 million Nigerians were pushed into poverty after subsidy removal.
A Critical Economic View
As an economist, I argue that the problem was not subsidy removal itself—which was inevitable—but the timing, sequencing, and structural gaps in Nigeria’s implementation.
- Structural Miscalculation
Nigeria’s four state-owned refineries remain nonfunctional. By removing subsidies without local refining capacity, the government exposed the economy to import-price pass-through effects—where global oil price shocks translate directly into domestic inflation. This was not just a timing issue but a fundamental policy miscalculation.
- Neglect of Social Safety Nets
Countries like Indonesia (2005) and Ghana (2005) removed subsidies successfully only after introducing cash transfers, transport vouchers, and food subsidies for the poor (World Bank, 2005). Nigeria, however, implemented removal abruptly, shifting the fiscal burden directly onto households without protection.
- Failure to Secure Food and Energy Alternatives
Fuel subsidy removal amplified existing weaknesses in agriculture and energy. Instead of sequencing reforms, government left Nigerians without refinery capacity, renewable energy alternatives, or mechanized agricultural productivity—all of which could have cushioned the shock.
Political and Public Concerns
Prominent leaders have echoed these concerns. Mr. Peter Obi, the Labour Party’s 2023 presidential candidate, described the subsidy removal as “good but wrongly timed.” Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party also faulted the government’s hasty approach. Human rights activists like Obodoekwe Stive stressed that refineries should have been made functional first, to reduce the suffering of citizens.
This is not just political rhetoric—it reflects a widespread economic reality. When inflation climbs above 30%, when purchasing power collapses, and when households cannot meet basic needs, the promise of reform becomes overshadowed by social pain.
Broader Implications
The consequences of this policy are multidimensional:
- Inflationary Pressures – Food inflation above 30% has made nutrition unaffordable for many households.
- Rising Poverty – 7.1 million Nigerians have been newly pushed into poverty (World Bank, 2023).
- Middle-Class Erosion – Rising transport, rent, and healthcare costs are squeezing household incomes.
- Debt Concerns – Despite promises, government borrowing has continued, raising sustainability questions.
- Public Distrust – When government promises savings but citizens feel only pain, trust in leadership erodes.
In effect, subsidy removal without structural readiness has widened inequality and eroded social stability.
Missed Opportunities
Nigeria’s leaders had the chance to approach subsidy removal differently:
- Refinery Rehabilitation – Ensuring local refining to reduce exposure to global oil price shocks.
- Renewable Energy Investment – Diversifying energy through solar, hydro, and wind to reduce reliance on imported petroleum.
- Agricultural Productivity – Mechanization, irrigation, and smallholder financing could have boosted food supply and stabilized prices.
- Social Safety Nets – Conditional cash transfers, food vouchers, and transport subsidies could have protected the most vulnerable.
Instead, reform came abruptly, leaving citizens to absorb all the pain while waiting for theoretical long-term benefits.
Conclusion: Reform With a Human Face
Fuel subsidy removal was inevitable, but Nigeria’s approach has worsened hardship for millions. True reform must go beyond fiscal savings to protect citizens.
Economic policy is not judged only by its efficiency but by its humanity. A well-sequenced reform could have balanced fiscal responsibility with equity, ensuring that ordinary Nigerians were not crushed under the weight of sudden change.
Nigeria has the resources, population, and resilience to lead Africa’s economy. But leadership requires foresight. It requires policies that are inclusive, humane, and strategically sequenced.
Reform without equity is displacement of poverty, not development. If Nigeria truly seeks progress, its policies must wear a human face.
References
- National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). (2023). Poverty and Inequality Report. Abuja.
- National Population Commission (NPC). (2023). Population Estimates. Abuja.
- World Bank. (2023). Nigeria Development Update. Washington, DC.
- World Bank. (2005). Fuel Subsidy Reforms: Lessons from Indonesia and Ghana. Washington, DC.
- OPEC. (2023). Annual Statistical Bulletin. Vienna.
By: Amarachi Amaugo
-
Politics4 days agoTinubu Swears In New INEC Chairman
-
News2 days agoReps Summon NAFDAC, Police, Others For Illicit Drug Probe
-
Niger Delta2 days ago
Coy Advocates Indigenous Innovation For Africa’s Energy Future
-
News2 days agoDangote Begins Refinery Expansion To 1.4mbpd
-
News5 days ago
Germany Promises Continued Support For Nigeria’s Anti-terrorism Fight
-
Business2 days agoNDDC Unveils Naval Facilities To Boost Region’s Security
-
News2 days agoRIVERS PEACE EFFORTS YIELDING RESULTS, SAYS FUBARA ….Promises Rehabilitation Of Internal Roads, GSS Akabuka
-
Sports2 days ago“Nigeria will go to World Cup”