Kano govt demands federal judge’s recusal from LG election case due to alleged bias
Kano State government has asked a judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Simon Amobeda, to recuse himself from hearing the case filed before him by the All Progressives Congress (APC) seeking a nullification of recently held local government election in the state.
The APC, alongside its chairman in Kano State, Abdullahi Abbas, and another of its chieftains, Aminu Aliyu Tiga, had in Suit No: FHC/KN/CS/425/2024 filed an Originating Summons seeking a nullification of the election and a seizure of the funds accruable to the 44 local government ares in the state from the federal government.
However, the Attorney General of the state (AG), in a motion filed before the court on Thursday, asked Justice Amobeda to recuse himself from the case due to his perception of him as biased, based on traits he has exhibited over time.
The AG said the judge nurses some grudges against the state government and its agencies since a state agency wrote a petition against the judge for abuse of privileges and indiscriminate granting of ex-parte applications, among others.
“The Honourable Judge took it personally against the state government. As a result, he has openly exhibited fury and has persistently lamented, to the hearing of all… The Judge spends good time in his court castigating the state government before his proceedings begin every time he sits in court”, the AG claims in an affidavit.
READ ALSO: NBA transmits requirements to apply for Federal High Court judge position
The state government claimed it noticed an “unusual concentration of the cases involving politically exposed persons belonging, especially to the opposition political parties against the state government” before the judge, indicating a sort of affinity between the judge and an opposition political party.
The government said the “Honourable Judge has been variously quoted in newspapers threatening to expose a Kano State government functionary who wrote the petition against him, expressing his anger while trying to show that the petition was unjustified.
“There is … animosity in Justice Amobeda’s open utterances, to the extent that citizens of the state are already expressing worry that his court may visit vindictiveness on the state government in matters involving government before him.”
The state government argued that its fear of bias from Justice Amobeda is already permeative among average citizens in Kano State.
“Ordinary persons who have listened to him go with a strong impression that my lord is not happy, in fact, angry with the state government. This forms the fulcrum of the claim of bias.”
Citing the case of Abiola V Federal Republic of Nigeria, the AG quoted the Supreme Court of Nigeria to have held unanimously that:
“A Judge should not hear a case if he is suspected of partiality because of consanguinity, affinity, friendship or enmity with a party, or because of his subordinate status towards a party or because he was or had been a party’s advocate. Also natural justice demands, not only that those interest that may be directly affected by an act or decision should be given prior notice and adequate opportunity to be heard, but also that the tribunal should be disinterested and impartial.
It is clear from the provision of Section 33(1) of the 1979 Constitution that the independence and impartiality of a court are part of the attributes of fair hearing. The requirement of impartiality is intended to prohibit a person from deciding a matter in which he has either pecuniary or any type of interest. Such other interest may arise from his personal relationship with one of the parties to the case or may be inferred from his conduct or utterances during the hearing of the matter. Thus, it is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to have been done …”
