Yunusa stood trial for three years before the NJC — which statutorily performs disciplinary functions on judicial officers — suspended him in 2016 in connection with the bribery charges pressed against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Premium Times reported in 2021.
The EFCC filed the case before the Lagos State High Court against Yunusa who at the time was serving at the Enugu Division of the Federal High Court.
But following the Muhammadu Buhari administration’s alleged failure to act on the NJC’s recommendation for Yunusa’s retirement, the NJC reinstated the judge in 2021 after five years of being on suspension.
Justice Mohammed Yunusa, a federal judge who sacked all Labour Party candidates in the 2023 election, was once recommended for compulsory retirement by the National Judicial Council (NJC) after he was found culpable of bribery charges.
Yunusa stood trial for three years before the NJC — which statutorily performs disciplinary functions on judicial officers — suspended him in 2016 in connection with the bribery charges pressed against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Premium Times reported in 2021.
The EFCC filed the case before the Lagos State High Court against Yunusa who at the time was serving at the Enugu Division of the Federal High Court.
But following the Muhammadu Buhari administration’s alleged failure to act on the NJC’s recommendation for Yunusa’s retirement, the NJC reinstated the judge in 2021 after five years of being on suspension.
Meanwhile, Yunusa sparked reactions from lawyers and members of the public on Friday after making a controversial judgement that nullified the candidature of several Labour Party candidates in the 2023 elections.
The judge ruled in a suit marked FHC/KN/CS/107/2023 that the Labour Party did not validly nominate candidates for “all elective positions in Kano and the rest of the 35 states of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory”.
The suit was filed by Mr Ibrahim Haruna Ibrahim against the Labour Party and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
But reacting, a Nigerian lawyer, Barrister Ugochukwu Ezekiel-Hanks, said the judgment is flawed in many ways.
Quoting Ezekiel-Hanks, “The matter was commenced few days ago and judgment was delivered within eight days. Within Eight Days! Wonderful!!
“How was the originating summons served and what happened to the days allowed by the Federal High Court rules for Defendants to file and serve their defence.
“Outside the germane question of territorial jurisdiction, the matter is also statute barred considering the fact that it challenged the validity of nomination of labour party candidates. It is a pre-election matter which ought to be filed within 14 days after the primary elections or occurrence of any other exercise complained of.”
Another lawyer, Richard Akinnola, similarly faulted Justice Yunusa, saying the matter was a pre-election case that “ought to have been filed with 14 days after the primaries” in line with provisions of the Electoral Act 2022.
Credit: people's acts