Powered By Blogger

Monday, January 5, 2015

JUSUN Strike: Lagos courts under lock and key

(NIGERIA) The indefinite nation wide strike, directed by leadership of the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN), yesterday saw the Federal High Court, Ikoyi, the National Indutrial Court, Ikoyi, the Lagos High Court, Ikeja and Igbosere, including all the Magistrates Courts shut down.

The industrial action specifically commenced on January 2, 2015. For instance, at the Federal High Court in Ikoyi, the Deputy Chief Registrar (DCR) of the court, Bello Okandeji, was sighted urging judicial workers to go back to their houses peacefully, apparently to avoid any form of chaos.

Also at the National Industrial Court, it was gathered that court activities were truncated
as members of the union were seen instructing workers to stop activities in compliance with the industrial action.

At both the High Court of Lagos State in Ikeja and Igbosere respectively, litigants and lawyers were prevented from getting access into the court premises by officials of JUSUN who were on ground to ensure compliance.

Besides, judges who reported for work at the early hours of the day were asked to go back as the gates were  earlier locked. The situation was also the same at Magistrates Courts where litigants were seen expressing disappoint over the situation.

The situation at the Lagos division of the Court of Appeal was slightly different as few registrars were seen at their duty post but none of the judges was on duty.

It would be recalled that JUSUN had issued a directive to all its members to from January 2, 2015,   embark on an indefinite strike to challenge what it termed the non-implementation the January 13, 2014 judgment of a Federal High Court in Abuja.

According to President of JUSUN, Comrade Marwa Mustapha Adamu, the strike would be total and not be suspended until the union's demand for the implementation of the judgement is met.

Adamu further explained that the industrial action would affect all courts  nationwide, until the total compliance with the judgment and the terms of Memorandum of Understanding.

The JUSUN president maintained that the action became imperative consequent upon the failure of state governments to implement the judgment of the Federal High Court, Abuja which granted financial independence to the judiciary.

According to Adamu, "The strike was called over breach of Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)  reached between JUSUN and the supervising minister of Labour and productivity and other relevant stakeholders.

"The Union encountered serious difficulties in making state governors implement and comply with the Judgment of the Federal High Court delivered on January 13, 2014.

"The judgment of the court was served on the Federal Accountant General; State Accountant Generals and States Auditor Generals for compliance. Uptil the statutory period of Appeal and now, none of those affected by the judgment or the parties served with the judgment and order of the court had appealed against it."

The Abuja Federal High Court, presided over by Justice Adeniyi Ademola had restrained the Federal Government (FG) and the 36 state governors, from holding on to funds meant for the judiciary.

The judge declared that funds meant for the judiciary should instead, be disbursed directly to the heads of court and not to the executive arm of government.

Justice Ademola in the suit filed by JUSUN insisted that the practice of the executive, disbursing funds to the judiciary was unconstitutional and also threatened the independence of the judiciary.

Quoting sections 83(1), 212(3) and 162(9) of the 1999 Constitution as amended to hang his decision, Justice Ademola posited that the provisions were clear and straightforward, and should therefore be complied with.

He maintained that the era of the judiciary going cap in hand to beg the executive for fund, was over, stressing that the allocation of funds through the states’ ministry of finance to the states’ judiciary was unconstitutional and should be stopped forthwith.

The judge then issued an order, directing compliance with the provisions of sections 81(3), 212(3) and 162(9) of the constitution in the disbursement of funds to the heads of courts forthwith.

No comments:

Post a Comment