New Telegraph

Ending era of secrecy in managing judiciary’s fund

TUNDE OYESINA writes that as canvassed by the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN), lawyers have asked the judiciary to embrace the open government initiative by keeping its financial books open for public scrutiny

 

Some senior lawyers have aligned themselves with the call by the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN), on the need for transparency and accountability in the management of budgetary allocation to the judiciary.

 

The lawyers were of the view that calls for more allocations to the judiciary, which is the third arm of government, should be complemented with an attitude of financial transparency and probity. To them, poor budgetary allocation to the judiciary is not a justification for lack of transparency and probity.

 

The AGF had while speaking recently at the Justice Sector Reform Summit organized by the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) alleged that judiciary’s budget is shrouded in secrecy. He said there was a need for the judiciary to embrace the open government initiative by keeping its financial books open for public scrutiny.

 

Malami while expressing reservations over calls for an upward review of judiciary’s budgetary allocation, said it is very crucial for the third arm of government to be transparent and accountable in the spending of the funds allocated to it in the country’s annual budgets.

 

He added that the Federal Government was not in a position to know whether the judiciary’s budget allocation was inadequate or not due to the opacity that characterises its financial records. Malami said: “Why is the N104 billion provided for the judiciary in the budget insufficient? We are not in a position to answer, because their (judiciary’s) books are not open”.

 

Querying how the judiciary applies its funds, Malami noted that until the three arms of government allow “the operation of an open government partnership arrangement, we can never be in a position to identify to what extent the budgetary provision made is inadequate”. “President Muhammadu Buhari-led government had prioritised the financial independence of the judiciary by issuing the Executive Order 10″, the AGF added.

Speaking in the same vein, Chairman, House of Representatives Committee on Judiciary, Luke Onofiok, said: “the judicial branch of government has transparency issues in its budget spending”. The lawmaker cited a scenario where a federal court paid allowances to its workers under the guise of “overtime” during the coronavirus pandemic when court sittings were restricted.

“During one of our oversight functions at a federal court, we had a running battle with a federal court; we discovered that overtime allowances were paid to workers during the coronavirus pandemic when court sittings were restricted,” Onofiok said.

 

On his part, Chairman of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), Bolaji Owasaonye, also called for more transparency in the management of judiciary’s budget. He further noted that ghost contracts and unretired funds have tainted the judiciary’s financial records.

 

Complaints over insufficient allocation

New Telegraph Law recalls that the Judiciary had times without number complained about insufficiency of the funds allocated to it in the nation’s budget. There is indeed a consensus among players in the Nigerian judiciary on the need for an increased budget for the third arm of government at both the state and federal levels.

 

Findings also revealed that the judiciary had proposed a budget of N120 billion for 2022. The proposed budgetary spending of N120 billion represents about nine per cent increase from the N110 billion that has remained the judiciary’s total vote for three consecutive years – 2019 to 2021.

The National Judicial Council (NJC) had in 2021 described the N110 billion allocation as paltry and nothing to write home about if the independence of the judiciary must be guaranteed.

The NJC said a situation where one agency would decide what others should get without the knowledge of its working environment was not in line with best global practices.

Executive Secretary of the NJC , Ahmed Saleh Gambo, had while appearing before the House of Representatives Committee on Judiciary said: “there is need for a paradigm shift in the judiciary budgeting regime. There is an urgent need for increased funding for the judiciary.

 

The Supreme Court was expanded to 20, the Court of Appeal and Federal High Court is in the process of appointing 20 additional judges”.

 

For several years, successive Chief Justices of Nigeria (CJN) have lamented the poor funding of the judiciary. In September 2013, the then CJN, Aloma Mukhtar, during a new legal year ceremony, bemoaned the judiciary’s steady budgetary decline from N95 billion in 2010 to N67 billion in 2013.

 

Since 2014, however, the budget has managed to climb from N68 billion to N110 billion in 2019 and remained so in 2020 and 2021. In 2022, the judiciary presented a budget of N120 billion.

 

This implies that if the budget is approved as presented, the judiciary’s budget would have only increased by N125 billion from what it was 12 years ago in 2010.

Aside from this, the acute shortage of infrastructure resulting in most Nigerian judges still recording proceedings in long hands and sitting in dilapidated or unconducive courthouses across the country, including the federal capital, is evidence of years-long underfunding.

A recent revelation by the President of the Court of Appeal, Monica Dongban-Mensem, about how poorly Nigerian judges are paid while federal legislators continue to enjoy “jumbo allowances” which analysts say are much higher than what most of their counterparts around the world receive, is another testimony of how poor the judiciary is being funded.

 

Lending credence to this, Vice President Yemi Osinbajo (SAN) has also called for an increase in salaries of judges. Osinbajo said: “While we ask for the best from our judicial officers, we must equally ensure that the conditions under which they operate are not only befitting but are good enough to attract the best of minds in our profession. Judicial remuneration and welfare are critical. Why should a judge earn so much less than a federal legislator?

There is no basis for it whatsoever. “We should in fact benchmark without necessarily creating fresh new legislation because the legislature doesn’t have any legislation about their own salaries.

 

“If we benchmark what a federal judicial officer/Court of Appeal Judge earns to what a House of Representatives member earns, you’d find a startling difference. If you benchmark a Supreme Court Justice to what a Senator earns, you’d notice the difference.

If we start that quick process now, we would not have to go through the rigorous process of legislation. We would just benchmark the salaries even if we are going to call it allowances.

“The truth of the matter is that the responsibilities of the Judge or Justice of Supreme Court/ Court of Appeal are such that they must be well remunerated. They are such that when they retire, they must be able to go to homes that they own in decent places where they live.

 

That’s the way it should be. We shouldn’t have a situation where judges are anxious that when they retire, they won’t have homes to go to, because their salaries today can’t build anything decent. We must ensure that these are the conditions that are met”. Lawyers speak In the meantime, a cross-section of senior lawyers have expressed deep concerns over what  they described as non-transparent mode of managing judiciary’s allocation.

 

They spoke at the weekend on the heels of a similar concern by the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN).

 

The lawyers tasked those at the helm in the nation’s judiciary on the need for transparency and accountability in the handling of its financial records, saying for the judiciary to uphold the democratic tenet of rule of law, it must ensure that its budget breakdowns are available for public auditing. Speaking on the issue, an Abuja-based lawyer, Dr. Abdulmalik Hassan, emphasized the need for transparency in handling of judiciary’s budget.

 

Hassan said: “The calls for more allocations to the judiciary is not being complemented with an attitude of financial transparency and probity, many have said. Poor budgetary allocation to the judiciary is not a justification for the lack of transparency and probity.

“The National Judicial Council (NJC) should be able to make public the breakdown of the little given to it. Many who called for a substantial rise in the judiciary’s budget also criticized the National Assembly for shrouding its budget in secrecy, overlooking the fact that the judiciary is as guilty”.

 

Another Abuja-based lawyer, Dr. Maxwell Ossai, opined that the well-being of any country is dependent on a functional and efficient judicial system, guided by transparency and accountability, and Nigeria is no exception. “No doubt, since the country returned to democracy in 1999, the judiciary has had its own fair share of the challenges. While all the problems facing the sector may not have been addressed, attention is being given to each of the problem at a time.

 

“The truth remains that if we must have a good country where rule of law is the guiding principle, then, a good justice system is an essential ingredient. It is factual that to build a nation where peace and justice reigns, there must also be proper functioning of all the compartments that makes up that nation, particularly the justice sector.

 

“This also, is without forgetting the fact that to have a sound justice sector for any nation, the indices of accountability, accessibility, transparency and respectability must be present.

 

As we are aware, transparency, accountability amongst others have reopened central stage in modern day administration as strategies for promoting good governance.

 

“Before the present administration came into office, some of these indices were lacking in the justice sector, but as it stands, there has been remarkable improvement in the administration of justice sector within the period under review.

 

“In the last five years or more, the justice sector witnessed both high and low moments. So many events happened that shaped the sector. While some were positive and commendable, others were not pleasant, hence, received condemnation and knocks.

 

“Interestingly, even the Attorney- General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN) has reiterated severally that the justice sector was laced with challenges and shortcomings prior to the coming of the President Muhammadu Buhari’s led government.

 

It is basically on that note that I will equally implore the judiciary to make public its budget”, Ossai said. In his own reaction, another senior lawyer, Derin Omowon, condemned the alleged secrecy in judiciary’s budget.

 

He consequently challenged the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Tanko Muhammad, to disclose the budget details of the judiciary in line with a Federal High Court order in 2013, which ruled that details of all statutory transfers in the 2013 Appropriation  Act (Budget) be released to the public.

 

Omowon said: “The judiciary enjoys statutory transfers from the federation account in accordance with the First Line Charge principle. “It is wrong in a constitutional democracy to want to use taxpayers’ money and keep the taxpayers in the dark as to how you want to use their money”. Another senior lawyer, James Onekpe, said as long as the judiciary was meant to ensure fiscal transparency and accountability, its financial books should be opened to public scrutiny.

 

He expressed disappointment with the judiciary for shrouding its finances in secrecy. He further noted that “for the judiciary to uphold the democratic tenet of rule of law, it must ensure that its budget breakdowns are available for public auditing.”

 

“So, our budget process must be strengthened in a way that the judiciary would be responsible to ensure that their expenditures are open to public scrutiny. “There should be no secret spending of public expenditure. If this is true, then, it is wrong for the judiciary to keep its budget breakdowns away from public view. “If that is the attitude of the judiciary in that respect, then, it is not correct. The public has the right to know how much is being allocated to the judiciary”, Onekpe said.

 

On his part, a right crusader, Collins Alfred Umere, said: “I will find it hard to believe that the budget details of the judiciary are not contained in the appropriation bill.

 

“The judiciary is not above the law, it should throw its books open. Everything done by the judiciary is supposed to be transparent, it is supposed to be open for scrutiny. “So, if they are opaque in the way they run their financial dealings, then, they will have no moral standing to adjudicate on cases that come before them”.

Read Previous

You have case to answer, court tells lawyer accused of N4m bribe by EFCC

Read Next

Emmanuel: Our policy makers make pronouncements without implementation

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *