Lawyers, at the weekend, were divided over the need for the splitting of the office of the Attorney General of the Federation and that of the Minister of Justice, which is lumped into one. While some opined that the office should be separated for effective service, others said the separation will lead to duplication of roles and responsibilities. The lawyers spoke as the nation awaits President Tinubu’s ministerial list.
Those on the list are expected to be screened by the Senate. The office of the Attorney-:General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice has long been regarded as one of the great and grand offices of State. The position has been occupied in the past by some great legal minds, among whom are; Teslim Elias ( former Chief Justice of the Federation), Richard Akinjide (SAN), Kehinde Sofola (SAN), Prince Bola Ajibola (SAN), Michael Agbamuche (SAN) and Dr. Olu Onaguruwa (SAN).
The 1999 Constitution named the Attorney General of the Federation, who equally doubled as the Minister of Justice, as the Chief Law Officer of the country. Section 150 (1) provides: “There shall be an Attorney-General of the Federation, who shall be the Chief Law Officer of the Federation and a Minister of the Government of the Federation, while Section 174 empowers the AGF with powers to carry out criminal prosecutions. At the state level, Sections 195 provides for the office of an Attorney General for each state, who shall be the Chief Law Officer of the state and Commissioner of Justice of the government of that state; while Section 211 (1) stipulates that the Attorney General of a state shall have power to: (a) Institute and undertake criminal proceedings against any person before any court of law in Nigeria other than a court-martial in respect of any offence created by or under any law of the House of Assembly; (b) take over and continue any such criminal proceedings that may have been instituted by any other authority or person and (c) discontinue at any stage before judgment is delivered, any such criminal proceedings instituted or undertaken by him or any other authority or person”.
The lingering call for the separation of the office of Attorney General from that of the Minister of Justice is based on the perceived influence or interference of the executive on the occupier of the office.
NASS’ intervention
Recall that the House of Representatives, in 2016, moved to separate the office of Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) from that of Minister of Justice. The move followed the second reading of a Bill for an Act to alter the 1999 Constitution to introduce the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation separate from the Minister of Justice. Presenting the Bill then, Mohammed Monguno (APC-Borno), said that if passed, it would emphasise the independence of the AGF’s office and ensure it was not subjected to political consideration.
Monguno said that separation of the AGF’s office would allow for effective separation of power, adding that the two offices would be given the necessary environment to function optimally. Monguno said, “The Attorney-General of the Federation, being the Chief Law Officer is empowered in Section 150 and 195 respectively of the 1999 Constitution to enter nolle prosequi.
“Nolle prosequi is an entry on the record of a legal action that denotes that the prosecutor or plaintiff will proceed no further in an action of suit either as a whole or as to some count or as to one or more of several defendants.
‘’The power can only be exercised if the office is free from any political interference. The office of the Attorney-General of the Federation is such an office that should be seen to be Independent and not be subjected to some political consideration”.
The Senate, in 2017, also voted in support of amendment to Sections 150, 174, 195 and 211 of the Constitution. Although the House of Representatives supported this move, it failed to get the support of two-thirds (24) of the State Houses of Assembly as required by Section 9 (2) and (3) of the Constitution. However, in 2022, the Joint Senate and House of Representatives Committee on Constitution Review recommended the separation of the office of the Attorney General of the Federation from the Minister of Justice.
According to reports, the recommendation was considered to avoid the visible politicization of the two critical offices. The lawmakers envisage that the minister of justice will deal with policy and administrative issues, while the AGF will oversee dispensation of justice without fear or favour.
Lawyers position
Speaking on the issue, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, (SAN), Yunus Uztaz, said: “The office of the Attorney General must be totally separated from that of the Minister of Justice. An AGF is not supposed to have any political inclination or belong to any political party. That is the only way he can discharge his functions and be a fully reflective AGF.
“The moment an AGF has a political party or belongs to one, he cannot perform his functions independently. To ensure that the office is sanctified, the AGF should not be appointed or removed at the pleasure of the Executive. He should only be removed by two-thirds votes of both Houses of the legislature. The moment that is done, the AGF can be expected to perform his duties independently and justifiably.
“Unless you separate them, you can never have an independently minded AGF. An AGF is not supposed to have any political sympathy. In fact, it should be such that the public should be able to ask the AGF questions when they are not satisfied with his performance”.
The Executive Director, Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC) and Country Director, Transparency International, Auwal Rafsanjani, in his own reaction, submitted that merging the two offices has not helped justice delivery in the country. According to him, “Therefore, it is absolutely important that we take necessary steps to separate them. While one is political, the other is technical and professional. We should separate them to allow for proper administration of justice because if we continue to allow the status quo to remain, we would be undermining justice in the country.
“Politics will prevail over justice and this is not good. It is important that when appointing the Minister of Justice, President Tinubu should set the process in place to separate the two offices. It will be good for the administration of justice. It will help probity and professionalism in the administration of justice. Even the fight against corruption will have better efforts and implementation.”
However, expressing contrary views, Oba Maduabuchi (SAN), kicked against the proposed amendment saying its a mere duplication of duties and waste of resources to split the office of the AGF into two.
“I don’t think it is the right thing to do. How can you separate the office? The AGF is also the Minister of Justice. It is mere polemics. To bifurcate the office of the AGF and say this is what the AGF does and this is what the Minister does?
”Any other job or duty which the AGF can do outside the constitution is done by the Solicitor General of the Federation and Permanent Secretary. There is no need to separate the office. Will the AGF be the Minister? Are you expecting two Ministers in the Federal Ministry of Justice? It is unnecessary duplication of functions”, Maduabuchi said.
Speaking in the same vein, Abdul Ibrahim (SAN) said the separation will lead to another crisis as it has to do with duties and functions of the holders of the offices. The silk said: “The question is what are the functions of the AGF and those of the Minister of Justice? But I think they are playing politics with it. It is not the occupant of the office of AGF that is the problem. What matters is allowing him to function very well without interference and political consideration.
”That is the main problem we have and not splitting. It’s about strengthening the institutions to make them work effectively. If you strengthen the system and the occupant of the office knows that his loyalty first and foremost lies with the country and the institution and not the president or person that appointed him, then we can not have any reason to complain”.
New Telegraph
