The murky waters of the events which culminated in the suspension of Honourable Justice Isa Ayo Salami as President of the Court of Appeal in August 2011 continue to be difficult to navigate.

The recent recommendation of the National Judicial Council that Justice Salami be reinstated has met with the overwhelming support of the legal community and indeed the general public. So why has President Goodluck Jonathan not approved the NJC recommendation and thereby heeded vox populi? That seems to be a simple enough thing to do. Or is it?

Justice Salami’s chief traducers appear to be elements within the ruling PDP, evidently still smarting from the Court of Appeal’s reversal of their INEC declared victories at the last polls.

In support of the President’s inaction, the Federal Attorney General has, quite predictably, advanced the argument that the whole matter concerning Justice Salami remains sub judice hence the President, being anxious to respect the rule of law, must do nothing. With much respect to the NJC, it would appear to have painted itself into a corner; it has prosecuted a position from which, sadly, there is no retreat.

Let us recall that in 2011 the NJC set up a subcommittee chaired by Honourable Justice Auta, CJ Federal High Court, to investigate this matter. That subcommittee decided that Justice Salami had perjured himself and had thereby violated the code of Conduct for Judicial Officers.

That decision was the express basis of the subsequent NJC recommendation to the President that Justice Salami be suspended. The unavoidable questions which arise are these – has the finding of perjury been reversed? In any event, does NJC have the power to reverse itself?

One further question – if the answer to the first two questions is in the negative, will the NJC recommendation for Justice Salami’s reinstatement not remain a mirage for as long as the basis of his suspension i.e. the decision of the Justice Auta panel subsists?

Again, even if the President were to order Justice Salami’s reinstatement, would the latter, known as he is for his characteristic courage and principled tenacity, find such a course acceptable without the prior clearing of his name from all blame by a reversal of the perjury decision?

After all, it is common knowledge that the same Justice Salami firmly resisted the attempt to ‘elevate’ him from the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court in February 2011. Let us not forget that. Again, it is the absence of the necessary reversal of the NJC decision which gives any weight at all to the ‘sub judice’ argument of the Attorney General because, plainly, if there is full exculpation, the courts will be left with nothing to try.

As I was reported as saying in Vanguard of Tuesday August 30, 2011: “In a matter of this nature, an out – of – court settlement would give to the general public the impression that dirt has once again been swept under the carpet.

I would prefer that these burning issues be vigorously agitated and decided once and for all in court, after a fully public hearing at which all the facts are revealed and exposed. I think that is crucially essential. We must give this matter a final and public burial, otherwise its ghost will continue to haunt us.”

In the meantime, sadly, the waters remain murky whilst clarity and closure elude us.