Alleged bias: Court adjourns motion to recuse itself from further presiding over malicious damage case to Sept. 24 for ruling

By Chuks Eke

A Grade II Chief Magistrate Court in Anambra state sitting at Ogidi in Idemili Magisterial District and presided over by His Worship, O. N. Erinne has adjourned a motion on notice asking her to recuse herself from further presiding over a criminal case of conspiracy and malicious damage to September 24, this year, for ruling.

The adjournment came shortly after hearing the motion on notice brought by a foremost Senior Advocate of Nigeria, SAN, Chief Ikenna Victor Egbuna.

In the motion on notice brought under Section 36(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended and under the inherent powers of the court, the Senior Advocate, Egbuna is asking Chief Magistrate Erinne to honourably disqualify herself from further presiding over the conspiracy and malicious damage case pending before her court as a result of likelihood of bias which he said he has so far observed while the trial of the matter is ongoing.

According to Chief Egbuna in the Motion No.MISC400/2024, “once a likelihood of bias is proved or established in a case pending before a court, it disqualifies the judge from further participating in that case and the judge is expected to recuse himself from handling the case”.

Egbuna insisted that in the present case, he has raised an allegation of likelihood of bias as the ground for this application, adding, “it is trite that an allegation of likelihood of bias against a judge is a very strong allegation and an applicant who raised such an allegation against a judge, must adduce by clear evidence in support of such allegation which we have done in this case”.

The Senior Advocate also insisted that the learned trial Chief Magistrate, O. N. Erinne ought to recuse herself from further presiding over the case as the ex-perte order in Motion No. HID/MISC.257/2022 which she made is in complete protection of the defendants, adding that there is a real likelihood of bias on her part.

According to him, “a look at the contumacious part of the ex-parte order she made on June 23, 2022 confirmed that she is not entitled to continue presiding over this matter. Upon the day of this application, motion on notice was not taken. The first defendant even confirmed under cross-examination that as soon as she got the ex-parte order, she did not bother going on with the case”.

Also in an affidavit in support of the motion she sworn to at the Chief Magistrate Court Registry, Dr. Kenechukwu Enweonwu, the second complainant in the conspiracy and malicious damage case, stated that the far reaching orders made by the learned trial magistrate in the case was used by the defendants to shield themselves without giving any opportunity for the complainants to be heard and uptill today, the orders have not been discharged.

Dr. Enweonwu further stated that it was as a result of the ex-parte order made by the trial Chief Magistrate that led to the untimely death of her mother, Mrs. Beatrice Ojiugo Okocha who was the first complainant in the criminal matter.

She contended that after carrying out the malicious damages in a most violent and brutish manner which raised the blood pressure of late Mrs. Okocha too high and led to her untimely death, the first defendant rushed to this very court and obtained the ex-parte injunction to frustrate police investigations into their vicious conducts.

Meantime, the court has awarded N100,000 cost in favour of each of the four defendants, against the second complainant, Dr. Enweonwu for seeking an adjournment to hear the motion on notice, rather than proceeding with the adoption of final addresses in the criminal matter, as scheduled on the last date of hearing.

Egbuna had asked the court for a short adjournment to enable the defendants file their counter motion in reply to the motion for the court to recuse itself from further presiding over the matter.

But counsel to the first defendant, C. C. Obikwelu xho reminded the court that the malicious damage case against the defendants was slated for adoption of addresses, asked for a cost of N500,000 iin favour of each of the four defendants as according to him, asking for adjournment by the prosecution counsel was a mere ploy to apply delay tactics and prolong the case.

In her ruling, the court adjourned the matter to September 11, for hearing of the motion to recuse herself from further presiding over the matter and consequently awarded a cost of N100,000 to each of the four defendants.

When the case was called up on September 11, the prosecution counsel, Egbuna, SAN prayed the court to disqualify herself, hands off the case in the interest of Justice and return the case file to the Administrative Magistrate of the Magisterial District for onward reassignment to another Magistrate Court for further proceedings.

Counsel to the first defendant, Obikwelu Esq. asked court to dismiss the motion with another cost of N500,000 in favour of each of the four defendants, while counsel to second to fourth defendants, V. M. Iloabachie also asked the court to dismiss the motion for lacking in merit, prompting Chief Magistrate Erinne to reserve ruling on the motion for September 24.

The Inspector-General of Police had iarraigned the four accused persons in an eight-count charge of conspiracy, malicious damage, unlawful possession of dangerous weapons, house breaking, breach of peace and threat to life and properties.