Supreme Court bars former AGF, Aondoakaa for life from holding public office in Nigeria

Former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice Michael Aondoakaa, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, has been permanently disqualified from holding public office in the country.

In a unanimous judgment delivered on December 10, 2021, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun of the Supreme Court affirmed a judgment of the Court of Appeal, Calabar division, which had previously upheld a Federal High Court decision barring the former Minister under late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua’s administration from holding public office in Nigeria.

In the Court of Appeal’s judgement on June 1, 2010, Justice A.F.A. Ademola ordered, “1. A declaration is hereby made that the 2nd Defendant undermined and subverted the rule of law, the due administration of justice and integrity of the judiciary in the letters of 8th January, 2008 and 16th February 2009 written by him in the capacity of the Defendant.

“2. A declaration is hereby made that 2nd Defendant is not a competent, fit and proper person to hold office as the 1st Defendant having regards to the oaths of Allegiance and office.

“3. N50,000,000,00 exemplary damages is hereby awarded against the 1st and 2nd Defendants in favour of the plaintiff.

“4. A perpetual injunction is hereby made restraining the 2nd Defendant from occupying/holding the office of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice and public offices in the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

However, in the case SC.939/2015, Aondoakaa petitioned the Supreme Court to vacate the Appellate Court’s September 3, 2015 verdict.

The Supreme Court’s five-member judicial panel included Justices Mary Peter-Odili, Kekere-Ekun, Mohammed Lawal Garba, Ibrahim Saulawa, and Emmanuel Agim. The panel also awarded N2million against the appellant in favor of the first respondent (Emmanuel Obot).

According to a 58-page certified true copy of the judgment, “the appellant (Aondoakaa) was irresponsible and acted in a manner unbecoming to the occupant of such an exalted office.”

Kekere-Ekun cited grounds provided by the lower court in its conclusion, which aligned with the stance taken by Justice Olubunmi Oyewole in the Court of Appeal verdict.

Oyewole was of the view that “The fact leading to this appeal captured a most sordid low in administration of justice in this country.

“It is unthinkable that the occupier of the exalted office of Attorney General would subvert the ends of justice, as was crudely done in this case by the appellant. Public office is a sacred trust and an Attorney General should epitomize all that is good and noble in the legal profession. That office should never again be occupied by individuals of such poor quality as the appellant.

“It is ironic that the appellant should approach the same temple he so brazenly desecrated for succor against the consequences of his appalling conduct.

“To restore the dignity of the legal profession and reinforce the confidence of the administration of justice. The Nigerian Bar Association is invited to the facts of this case and the judicial reactions thereto and subject the appellant to its appropriate disciplinary processes.”

The litigations, which carried on for 15 years, began with the People’s Democratic Party’s primary election in December 2006 for the nomination of a candidate for the Uyo Federal Constituency in Akwa Ibom State in the April 2007 general elections.

After Obot was “duly presented to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the PDP candidate,” he was replaced with the name of Bassey Etim.

On December 12, 2007, the Court of Appeal, Calabar division, rendered decision in favor of Obot in appeal CA/C/45/2007, directing the President of the Court of Appeal to establish a new Tribunal to hear Obot’s case in Uyo.

Following a petition from Etim, Aondoakaa wrote a letter to the President of the Court of Appeal, requesting him not to comply with the Court of Appeal’s Calabar division’s judgment ordering the formation of a new panel of justices to hear the case.

Despite Aondoakaa’s letter, the President of the Court of Appeal proceeded with the appointment of a new panel of justices in accordance with the court’s instruction.

On April 18, 2008, the new panel ordered that Obot be sworn in as the member representing Uyo Federal Constituency in the House of Representatives, and Etim’s challenge to the Court of Appeal was denied with an order that INEC provide a Certificate of Return to Obot.

Curiously, despite the fact that the Court of Appeal’s decisions are final in appeals arising from National and State Houses of Assembly elections, the former AGF wrote to the then-Chairman of INEC, Maurice Iwu, urging him not to obey the Court of Appeal’s judgment, which he described as a “obvious desecration of the judiciary institution.”

Simultaneously, he wrote to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, asking him to disobey the verdict but “to maintain the status quo ante” until the Supreme Court issued its final ruling.

As a result of Aondoakaa’s letters to the INEC chairman and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Obot was not issued a Certificate of Return nor sworn into the office to which he was elected to serve the people of Uyo Federal Constituency. As a result, he filed a law suit against the then-AGF in his personal and official capacity at the Federal High Court, Calabar division on May 15, 2009 through his lawyer, Uwemedimo Nwoko (SAN).