Legal Ethics

By Ibrahim Ahmad Kala, LL.M

The court is where counsel will spend the rest of his years at the Bar trying to persuade to his view. One cannot carry it along with him if, by lack of manners, one alienates its feelings beyond recall or consistently.

Similarly, the Bar is entitled to be treated with dignity by the Bench. A situation where a member of the Bar is subjected to unnecessary stress and indignity by the Bench contravenes the principle of reciprocity. Here the counsel should not respond with rudeness, but by submitting his grievances to the proper authorities.

The attainment of justice cannot be achieved if judicial officers fail to carry themselves with dignity and decorum in the discharge of their duties. They must at all time develop and maintain judicial mind and be temperate and not temperamental so that the process of administration of justice would not be tempered. However, experience has shown that it is those judges who have refused to acquire the “Judicial mind” that have often been subjected to criticism. Mackenzie said of such judges in the following word:

“Unfortunately, the system has produced many trial judges who lack the temperament necessary to match their power. Many are tyrannical, heavy-handed and abusive toward Lawyers and Litigants who appear in their courts”

In a recent case of MUSA vs. PINNACLE COMMERCIAL BANK & ANOR (2019) LPELR-48016 (CA), M. L. Garba, JCA (as he then was, now JSC) lend his voice on Duty of a Judge to not embarrass or insult a Counsel in the following wordings:

“It must be remembered that Counsel who appear before the Courts to represent parties in cases/matters are, as much as the Judges, officers of the Courts who deserve to be treated with respect in the conduct of proceedings. Even in situation where the conduct of a Counsel calls for criticism or admonition by the Court, appropriate language to be employed by the Court should be courteous, decent, but firm such that the message would be direct and clear, but not scurrilous, abusive and disparaging of the personal integrity and character of Counsel.

Judges, as representatives of the creator on Earth in the Temple of Justice, are expected to be above the ordinary and be extra ordinary in patience, dignity, decency and humanity in words and actions;in the Court rooms where they are “Lords” and outside of the Court. In the words of Ogundare, JSC, in Menakaya v. Menakaya (supra) “We Judges owe it a duty to be restrained and civilized in dealing with those counsel, parties and members of the public who appear in our Courts.” I also find the admonition by Uwaifo, JCA, (as he then was) in Salim v. Ifenkwe (supra), apt when he said:- “It is indecent and discourteous of any Judge to take undue advantage of his immunity to embarrass a Counsel with insults and scurrilous remarks. That is a clear case of abuse of privilege.

The Court is and must be run as a solemn, dignified and civilized forum where the sacred duty of the administration of justice is carried out on a consistent sobriety of the mind. It is not a pandemonium where insults are shouted….” In the premises, I find merit in the submissions of the Appellant that the statement by High Court on his person and professional conduct in the Ruling on the Notice of Summons dated 4th February, 1998 was totally unwarranted unsupportable in law and should not be allowed to stand.”_ Per *GARBA, JCA.* (Pp.17-24, Paras. D-A).

Hence judicial officers of this category in Nigeria or indeed anywhere in the world are a negation of the integrity facet of the tradition of the legal profession.

While it is true that the Nigerian judiciary has many gifted, learned and honest Lawyers/Judges/Justices who have occupied and still occupying judicial offices in Nigeria and some commonwealth countries, it is the judicial officer whose conduct falls below the required standard that usually occupies the headlines in both the press and electronic media when the National Judicial Council (NJC) descend on him or her. 

It is therefore, of paramount importance that every person who has been called upon to discharge the duties of a judicial officer must abide by his judicial oath and maintain the dignity of his exalted office. This is a noble pursuit. It is necessary to say to all engaged in judicial administration to borrow the words of Crompton J. thus:

“Let your zeal be as warm as your heart’s blood, but let it be tampered with discretion and with self-respect. Let your independence be firm and uncompromising, but let it be chastened by personal humility, let your love for liberty amount to a passion, but let it not appear to be a cloak for maliciousness”.

Both Islam and Christianity which are the two prevalent religions in Nigeria and which to the understanding of many, have adherence from among the members of the Bar and Bench, have alluded more spiritual injunctions for those engaged in the administration of justice.

The Holy Bible in the book of Deuteronomy Chapter 16,verse 18-20, and in the Holy Qur’an Surah Nisai, Chapter IV,verse:135 – which all have bearing with the oaths phrase” …to do justice to all manner of people without fear or favour, affection or ill will, so help me God”, demand from judicial officers to refrain from perverting the course of justice; showing partiality; accepting bribe; and subverting the course of righteousness. The Challenge however, lies in the will, innate ability or conviction to avoid those that are formidable, and to do what is right.

In conclusion, although the court in Law is the judge, the court in general parlance, consists of the judge and the Bar. Both are indispensable partners in the administration of justice. None is made more important than the other. The Bench cannot function without the Bar and vice versa. Hence, in order to ensure smooth administration of justice, there should be reciprocal respect. There should be the spirit of give and take in the courtroom.

The Bench even though, decides cases brought before it by the Bar members, it should not feel superior. After all, it is the Bar that supplies the judicial personnel and also feed the Bench with the tools of the case, in terms of facts and the law. Although, that has never given the Bar any “upper hand” in terms of superiority over the Bench! Once there is mutuality of purpose between the Bar and the Bench, litigation and adjudication no longer become tedious, but pleasant and easygoing.

Ibrahim Ahmad Kala Esq is the Head of Litigation Department, Court of Appeal Gombe division and can be reached via ibrokalaesq@gmail.com