By Musa Tanimu Nasidi
The Supreme Court has declared as unlawful and unconstitutional the Executive Order 10, EO10, issued by President Muhammadu Buhari on the funding of State Judiciary and Legislature.
In a split decision on Friday, the majority of the court’s seven-member panel agreed that the Executive Order was inconsistent with the 1999 Constitution and therefore null and void and of no effect whatsoever.
The apex court also rejected the request of the state governors for an order to compel the Federal Government to take up funding of capital projects for state high courts, Sharia Court of Appeal and Customary Court of Appeal.
The justices also refused to grant an order by the state governors to compel the Federal Government to pay them N66 billion so far spent on capital projects for the three courts in their respective states.
In declaring the EO10 unconstitutional, Justice Musa Dattijo Muhammad, in the lead majority judgment, said: “This country is still a federation and the 1999 Constitution it operates is a federal one.
“The Constitution provides a clear delineation of powers between the state and the Federal Government.
“The President has overstepped the limit of his constitutional powers by issuing the Executive Order 10. The country is run on the basis of the rule of law,” Justice Mohammed said in the lead majority judgment.”
Five out of the seven Justices on the panel agreed with Justice Muhammad on this issue. They are: Justices Centus Nweze, Ejembi Eko, Helen Ogunwumiju, Emmanuel Agim and Adamu Jauro.
Only Justice Uwani Abba-Aji dissented on this issue and held that EO10 was lawful and constitutional.
She said: “We are not unaware of the hanky-panky and subterfuge played by state governors against the independence and financial autonomy of state Judiciary.
“It is a pitiable eyesore what judicial officers and staff go through financially at the hands of state executives, who often flout constitutional and court orders to their whims and caprices.
“Thus, the presidential Executive Order 10 is meant to facilitate the implementation of the constitutional provisions…the Executive Order is to aid the states legislature and judiciary in curing the constitutional wrong of their financial autonomy, which the state have always denied. This is not unconstitutional,” Abba-Aji said.
On the second issue, four members of the panel rejected the plaintiffs’ contention that it was the responsibility of the Fed Govt to fund both the capital and recurrent expenditures of the superior courts created for states under Section 6 of the Constitution.
On this issue, Justices Nweze, Ogunwumiju and Abba-Aji agreed with Justice Muhammad’s lead majority judgment.
Three members of the panel: Justices Ejembi Eko, Emmanuel Agim and Adamu Jaro gave a dissenting opinion, to the effect that it was the Fed Govt’s responsibility to fund both the capital and recurrent expenditures of all courts created under Section 6 of the Constitution.
Justice Eko, who authored the lead minority decision, said the money standing to the credit of the Judiciary on the Federation Account and Consolidated Revenue Fund Account should be applied to fund both the capital and recurrent expenditures of courts created under Section 6 of the Constitution.
All the seven members however rejected the request by the plaintiffs that the Federal Government be compelled to refund to them all that they have spent on the said courts in their states.
The court held that the states were not entitled to be refunded all they have spent before now to maintain those courts, which they put at N66billion.
The apex court said the plaintiffs failed to prove their entitlement to the refund they claimed.
