By Ikechukwu Nnochiri
ABUJA—The Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Dahiru Musdapher yesterday barred all judicial organs from commenting on matters pending in court without first securing his express permission.

Justice Musdapher who gave the order in a statement he issued in Abuja yesterday said the decision was to avoid misrepresentations and /or pre-empting court decisions.

The acting Chief Justice gave the order on a day a Federal High Court disqualified two Senior Advocates of Nigeria who appeared in court to represent embattled former President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Isa Ayo Salami who is challenging his suspension by the National Judicial Council.

The statement by the acting CJN which was signed by the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court, Sunday Olorundahunsi read: “the Acting CJN, Hon. Justice Dahiru Musdapher, CFR, has barred all organs of the Nigerian Judiciary from commenting directly or indirectly on matters pending before any court of law.

“The Hon. CJN has directed that henceforth recourse should be made to his office by heads of all judicial organs before any comments or information could be made public to avoid misrepresentation and/ or pre-empting court decisions.”

Justice Dahiru Musdapher

Meanwhile, the embattled former President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Isa Ayo Salami who is challenging his suspension by the National Judicial Council commenced his legal battle to nullify his suspension yesterday on a dramatic note as the court disqualified two Senior Advocates of Nigeria who appeared in court to represent him even as the NJC challenged the jurisdiction of a Federal High Court to entertain Salami’s suit.

A mild drama ensued in the open court, shortly after the two SANs, Chief Emeka Ngige and Abiodun Owonikoko, announced their appearances for Justice Salami.

Before the counsel could introduce other junior lawyers in their team, counsel to the former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Aloysius Katsina-Alu, Mr Lucius Nwosu, challenged the legality of their appearance in the matter, alleging that they were meddlesome interlopers.

Nwosu told the court that the two senior counsel were bereft of the right to represent the plaintiff considering that their names were not contained in either the writ of summons or any of the processes filed before the court, which he said contained the list of counsel briefed by the plaintiff to handle the case on his behalf.

He urged the court to take judicial notice of the fact that the plaintiff, Salami, in all the processes he filed before the high court, specifically named Chief Akin Olujimi, SAN, Oluwarotimi Akeredolu, SAN, and Chief Niyi Akintola, SAN, as his counsel, even as he argued that under Order 9 Rule 35(1) and Rule 12(3) of the Federal High Court Rules, the duo, needed to file an affidavit notifying the trial court that they are the new counsel in the matter.

Consequent upon his argument, all the other defendants in the matter took turns and urged the judge to disqualify the SANs from handling the case for the plaintiff yesterday, contending that they could only hold watching-brief for those counsel originally listed in the court processes.

Defending his appearance in court, Ngige who insisted that they were not holding brief for anyone, further maintained that there was presumption of authority that any lawyer who announces appearance for a plaintiff, does so with express instruction, noting that the onus was not on a defendant to raise such objections but on the client to inform the court that he never briefed the lawyer to appear on his behalf.

Ngige also relied on the decided case law in Tukur Vs Gov. Gongola State and Abiola Vs FIRS, and prayed the trial judge to discountenance the objections of the defendants and allow them to handle the matter for Justice Salami.

Dismissing the contention of the defendants, Ngige, stressed that the Federal High Court Rules, provided for only one legal practitioner to append his signature on the processes, adding that the names of other counsels appearing on any of the process would amount to surplus.

Sequel to the agitations, Presiding Justice Okorowo who initially stood-down the case till 2pm for ruling, however could not decide on the line of argument to uphold till around 4: 30pm when he reconvened the court.

In his ruling, the judge disqualified the two counsels from appearing on behalf of Justice Salami, saying that their representation was “inchoate”.

The judge who noted that there could have been no difference assuming the objections were not raised by the defendants, held that in view of what transpired in the open court yesterday, the presumption of authority could not inure in favour of the disqualified lawyers pending when the processes are regularized.

Meanwhile, at the point the ruling was about to be delivered, Chief Olujimi, SAN resurfaced and announced his appearance as the lead counsel in the matter, even as he named both Ngige and Owonikoko as his partners.

The case was yesterday adjourned till September 26 for mention.

However, NJC in a preliminary objection filed by its counsel, Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN, prayed the court to strike out and/or dismiss Justice Salami’s suit for want of competency, adding that the court lacks the requisite jurisdiction to entertain same.

NJC argued that what Justice Salami is praying the court to do was to set-aside an already completed act, stressing that such relief could not be granted by way of an interlocutory order as sought by the plaintiff.

The legal body argued that Salami could not ask for an order that could have the effect of determining the substance of the main suit pending before the court and of which evidence viva voce will be required.

“An order setting aside an act already completed cannot be granted by way of an interlocutory application as doing so will amount to granting a relief and asking the maintenance of the status quo of an act already completed”, it argued.

Likewise, NJC noted that, “Chief Akin Olujinmi, SAN, counsel to Salami is the principal partner with Rotimi Akeredolu, SAN in the law firm known as Olujinmi and Akeredolu, which Rotimi Akeredolu, SAN is a member of NJC, the defendant applicant in the suit.

“As a result, the applicant believes that there is obvious conflict of interest since Akeredolu knowing the secret and inner workings of the NJC of which he is a member, cannot possibly litigate against the NJC using his alter ego, Chief Olujinmi”.

Furthermore, NJC told the court that the whole matter was politically motivated, academic and moot considering that the act of suspension of Salami has already been completed.