Bulkachuwa and the law

The Court of Appeal got it wrong on the matter of Justice Bulkachuwa’s membership of the presidential petitions tribunal. It held that the law does not require the President of the Court of Appeal to recuse herself from the pending presidential election case. But the President still recused herself based on “personal reasons”. This is a contradiction. The only reason a judge should refuse to handle a case properly before her is only for reason of law.

If the judge rules that the law does not require her to exclude herself from handling a case, it is a breach of judicial responsibility to refuse to handle the matter. The tenets of judicial craft are courage and professionalism. The judicial craft does not respond to public opinion unless it is in the interest of justice according to law. So, why deny that the law requires you to recuse yourself and yet decline to participate on personal reason? Does not make judicial sense.

By the law, I think the judges were wrong on their conclusion. The Supreme Court has held that it is the political party that contests elections through its candidates. Therefore, the dispute before the court is one between the PDP and the APC. This is a political case, so conflict arises from ideological relationships rather than pecuniary links. If the husband and son of the judge are high-ranking members of the party before the judge, then a potential case of conflict and bias arises.

This is not just a case of filial relationship that does not necessarily raise the issue of bias when the relatives are not before the court. In this case the party that the husband and son are high profile chieftains is before the judge. A reasonable person will feel and believe she would not be impartial. This is not about her character. It is about likelihood of bias. I believe that My Lord is a very credible judge but she ought to recuse based on the law not on ‘personal reason.’

Dr Sam Amadi,

Abuja.

Leave a Reply