The Appeal Court on Tuesday said justices of the Court that determined the appeal of Nnamdi Kanu are not targets of its routine posting exercise.
In a statement, the Chief Registrar of the Court, Umar Bangari said routine posting of justices is “aimed at reinvigorating the justice delivery system of the Court”.
Bangari, however, said only one of the three justices that determined the appeal of Kanu, leaders of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) was affected by the routine posting of the Court.
PRESS RELEASE
RE: NNAMDI KANU: 3 JUSTICES ON APPEAL COURT PANEL TRANSFERRED
The attention of the Court of Appeal has been drawn to a publication in the Vanguard Newspaper of Monday 24th October, 2022, as well as its online version, with the caption “Nnamdi Kanu: 3 Justices on Appeal Court Panel Transferred”, followed by similar publications by other newspapers
The publications in question conveyed the innuendo to the effect that the recent postings of justices of the Court of Appeal were in connection with, or in response to the judgment of the Court of Appeal of 13th October, 2022 in Nnamdi Kanu V. the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
We wish to state categorically that the general postings of the Justices of the Court of Appeal under reference were routine and aimed at reinvigorating the justice delivery system of the Court. In fact, 21 out of 81 Justices, including 6 Presiding Justices of the Court, were affected by the postings.
Indeed, of the 3 Justices that sat and determined the said Appeal, only one was affected by the general postings
It is therefore incorrect and uncharitable to insinuate that the Hon. Justices who delivered the judgment in the Nnamdi Kanu Appeal were the targets of the routine posting exercise. A few minutes of inquiry by the Vanguard Newspaper, or the other Media houses that followed up with similar publications, could have clarified this fact; unless of course the publication was intended for other purposes.
Details of the recent postings are available in the office of the Chief Registrar of the Court for verification.
We also appeal to the Vanguard Newspaper in particular and the media in general to exercise restraint and circumspection in reporting matters pertaining to the Court and its operations. The Court of Appeal has an open door policy of providing easy access to the Media to make inquiries and seek clarifications on any matters of interest to the media for the benefits of the general public.
It is therefore unhealthy to rush into publishing unconfirmed information as in this case, please.
We urge members of the public to discountenance this misinformation.
Umar M. Bangari, Esq.
Chief Registrar.
