Last Tuesday, the Federal Government sent to the National Assembly, a bill seeking the establishment of a special anti-corruption court to try serious crimes, including corruption cases. The Special Crimes Bill 2016 drafted by the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption proposes “An Act to provide for the establishment of a Special Crimes Court as a superior court of record to allow for speedy trials of certain offences, including economic and financial crimes, terrorism, money laundering and corruption offences and for related matters.” Under the existing legal framework, the offences are being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC) before federal and state High Courts.
Apparently, a major reason for the proposed special court is the delay in concluding corruption trials. In this connection, the provision of Section 45 under the “Transitional provisions” of the proposed law is instructive. It states that “A High Court or any other court shall continue to hear and determine trials and other criminal proceedings in respect of scheduled offences which are part-heard before the commencement of this Act, and any trial or other criminal proceedings not determined or concluded at the expiration of one year after the commencement of this Act, shall abate and the trial or other proceedings may be brought before the court for fresh hearing.”
This is not the first time the administration has mooted the idea of special courts to tackle corruption. For instance, in August last year, the government indicated its plan to set up thirty-seven specialised courts in all the states and Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, to solely and speedily try alleged looters. However, the majority of the judges nominated for probable appointment as heads of the proposed courts reportedly failed the integrity test conducted by security agencies. In a way, this was bound to be the case because the major criteria for integrity, including the provisos that the nominee must be a bold judge who did not give sentimental judgments, and must also have had less judgments thrown out at the Court of Appeal, were as questionable as the very idea of special courts.
As we insisted in our previous editorials, while the administration’s avowed resolve to tackle corruption in the polity is laudable, the proposal to establish special courts to achieve that objective defies logic. This is because corruption cases can be successfully tackled using extant laws. There is an administrative process in the courts which the Federal Government can take advantage of but has refused to explore. For instance, in Lagos, different cases are assigned to specific judges under the current administrative system. It will also be recalled that, sometime ago, the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Mallam Abubakar Malami, announced the inauguration of special prosecutors to tackle high profile corruption cases. However, not a single case has been prosecuted by the so-called special prosecutors till date.
We are persuaded that, rather than establishing special courts, the Federal Government, working in collaboration with the authorities of the judiciary, should commit itself to decisively addressing the strictures in the current judicial system. In our view, the pervasive corruption in the judiciary will not automatically disappear with the establishment of special anti-corruption courts, if only because the personnel to man those courts are going to be sourced from the present system that the special court seeks to displace. What is more, there is apparent illogic in the suggestion that the special courts will be manned by a special class of judges with special moral and intellectual qualities, while the regular courts continue to harbour judges with shady qualities. If a judge is not good enough for a special court, why is he or she good enough for the regular courts?
Again, the slow pace of trial in extant corruption cases is not due to the courts alone. Nigerians have witnessed cases in recent times where counsels have tried to abuse the system by seeking frivolous reliefs to pervert the cause of justice. How will the proposed special court tackle this problem? Besides, establishing special courts has huge financial implications, and the potentiality to merely duplicate the duties of the existing courts while adding no value to the system. More fundamentally, the currently proposed special court, when established, will not have taken away the powers conferred on the existing courts by the Constitution, and those dissatisfied with its judgement will be free to lodge appeals in the appellate courts, thus ensuring a vicious circle.
We call on the National Assembly to throw out the proposed bill and encourage the executive to liaise with the judicial authorities in coming up with more innovative ways to tackle the pervasive corruption in the polity.
