NJC Reverses Appointment Of Acting Imo CJ, Suspends Three Other Justices
The National Judicial Council (NJC) has directed the Governor of Imo State, Hope Uzodinma, to reverse the appointment of the Acting Chief Judge of the state, Justice Theophilus Nnamdi Nzeukwu, and appoint the most senior judge as the Acting Chief Judge of the state.
The NJC, under the leadership of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, also directed that Justice Nzeukwu should be issued a query to show cause within seven days why disciplinary action should not be taken against him for presenting himself to be sworn in as the CJ.
Justice Nzeukwu was sworn in by Governor Uzodimma as the Acting Chief Judge of Imo State on April 4.
The swearing-in of Nzeukwu came months after the former Chief Judge, Justice Theresa Chikeka, was removed by the National Judicial Council (NJC) following an indictment for age falsification.
However, the NJC also directed the President of the Customary Court of Appeal, Imo State, Justice V. U. Okorie, who acted as Interim Chairman of the Imo State Judicial Service Commission and recommended the appointment of Justice Nzeukwu to show cause within seven days why disciplinary action should not be taken against him for his complicity in the recommendation.
According to the statement by the Deputy Director of Information of the NJC, Kemi Ogedengbe Babalola, the council took the decisions at its 108th meeting held on April 29 and 30, 2025.
The council also suspended three serving judicial officers, including a justice of the Court of Appeal for one year each without pay for various acts of judicial misconduct.
Those suspended are Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Court of Appeal, Uyo Division, following the Investigation Committee’s findings that the justice breached Rule 3 (5) of the Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers.
Inyang was found to have abused his office by issuing inappropriate ex parte orders for the sale of Udeme Esset’s petrol station and other businesses at the interlocutory stage of the case.
“The act of judicial misconduct occurred while His Lordship presided over Suit No. FHC/UY/CS/46/2023, at the Federal High Court, Uyo Judicial Division, before his elevation to Court of Appeal.
“Furthermore, Hon. Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja Division, has also been placed on suspension for one year without pay. His Lordship was also placed on a watch-list for five years and barred from elevation for five years,” the statement read in part.
The complaints against Justice Ekwo arose from Charge No. FHC/ABJ/CR/184/2021, wherein His Lordship delivered a ruling in a pending application without hearing the parties.
“His Lordship ignored an application to set aside the proceedings of the court conducted in the absence of the parties. Subsequently, His Lordship proceeded to deliver a ruling dismissing the charge against the defendants.
“Consequently, His Lordship was found to have violated Rule 3.1 and 3.3 of the 2016 Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,” it said.
The NJC also suspended Justice Aminu Baffa Aliyu of the Federal High Court, Zamfara Division, for a period of one year without pay for judicial misconduct in breach of Rule 3 (1) and 5 of the 2016 Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers.
It also placed him on the watch-list for three years within which period he would be barred from elevation.
Justice Baffa was found liable for an act of judicial misconduct in Suit No. FHC/GS/CS/30/2021, the Government of Zamfara State vs EFCC, wherein he granted an order restraining security agencies from carrying out their statutory duties, and disregarded the doctrine of stare decisis in adjudication of the case.
The council issued a warning letter to Justice Hon. Justice Abimbola Awogboro of Federal High Court, Lagos Division in a petition filed by one Kasali Azeez Olagoke and S. Hamza in Suit No. FHC/CS/2021 between Chief Adesanya Musediku against Assistant General of Police, Onikan, Zone 2.
It also considered the report of its Preliminary Complaints Assessment Committee, which contained a total number of 43 petitions.
Nine committees were empanelled for further investigation of 11, while 29 petitions against judges were dismissed for lacking in merit.
The council at the meeting finally resolved that henceforth, the names of candidates being considered for appointment as judicial officers to superior courts of records would be published for information and comments by the public.
