NJC Bars Judges, Judicial Workers From Accepting Gifts

As part of measures to enhance the independence of the judiciary,
the National Judicial Council, NJC, has barred judges and other
court staff from accepting gifts from other arms of government.

The move is aimed at enhancing the independence of the judiciary,
as it also outlawed any form of lobbying of other arms of
government by the judiciary or any of its institutions.

The new measures are also set out to curb corruption and other
unethical conduct among judicial officers and other court staff,
especially against the backdrop of recent raiding of homes and
arrest of some Supreme and High Court judges in the country.

These form part of the provisions in a new National Judicial
Policy, NJP, to be launched in Abuja today by the NJC. The
measures, which are part of a new NJP to be launched in Abuja
today, seeks to merge and improve on the existing NJC NJP and a
similar policy by the National Judicial Institute, NJI.

The existing Code of Conduct for judicial officers provides that “a
judge and members of his/her family shall neither ask for nor
accept any gift, bequest, favour, or loan on account of anything
done or omitted to be done by him in the discharge of his duties.
“But, the provision in the new policy particularly bars judges and
other court staff from accepting gifts from other arms of
government, and made compliance mandatory.”

Section 2(3)(2) of the new policy states: “The Code of Conduct for
Judicial Officers and Code of Conduct for Court Employees, with
the amendment discouraging acceptance of gifts from other arms
of government, should be such as would be adequate. Compliance
with their provisions shall be mandatory.”

Further on its relationship with other arms of government, it is
prescribed that “the judiciary shall not resort to lobbying in
ensuring that the legislature and the executive perform their
constitutional responsibilities. “All arms of government should
respect the doctrine of Separation of Powers as enshrined in the
Constitution.”

The policy also introduced measures to further keep complaints
against judges and other court staff from the media and public
domain. Provisions in this regard are contained in section 2(2)(4)
to 2(2)(9). It states further:

“It shall be the policy of the judiciary on complaints of misconduct
against judicial officers or employees of the judiciary shall not be
leaked or published in the media.

“Where complaints on allegations against judicial officers and
court employees are submitted for investigation, the complainant
or complainants shall be made to give an undertaking not to do
anything to prejudice investigation or actions that may be taken.

“The institutions of the judiciary concerned with investigation or/
and implementation of decisions taken on such complaints shall
be obliged to cease further action where such complaints are
leaked or discussed in the media.

“Where such a leakage is occasioned after the submission of a
complaint, then all investigations on the complaints shall be
suspended, the leakage investigated and if such leakage is from
the complainant or through other parties known to such a
complainant, such a complaint should be discarded.

“Where such leakage is occasioned prior to the presentation of the
complaint and the source of the leakage is found to be the
complainant or through other parties known to and connected with
the complainant, then such complaint shall not be accepted, upon
submission, by the appropriate disciplinary body.

“On conclusion of investigation, the disciplinary bodies may allow
public disclosure of their findings, subject to following the proper
channels.”

Culled:Vanguard