My Innocent Statement Taken Out Of Context – Malami Denies Blaming Judiciary For Delayed Trials In Nigeria

The AGF in a statement on Wednesday evening by his Special Assistant (Media and Public Relations), Umar Gwandu said the statement credited to him which sparked the debate was taken out of context.

It would be recalled that Malami who was a guest on Channels Television’s program, Politics Today, on Monday, was quoted to have blamed the judiciary for the perceived delays in the conclusion of high-profile corruption cases.

However, dissatisfied with Malami’s attack on the judiciary, the Chief Justice of Nigeria, CJN, Justice Ibrahim Muhammad, has said that the judiciary is not responsible for the delay in the trial of corruption cases involving high profile politicians.

Muhammad accused the Federal Government and its agencies of conducting shoddy investigations before rushing to court to file charges.

In an attempt to set the records straight and douse the developing tension, Malami has now clarified that it was some mischief makers that took his statement on Monday out of context.

According to him, he was only trying to emphasize the principle of separation of power between the different arms of the government and the demonstrated efforts by the current administration to promote non-interference by the executive in the affairs of the legislature and the judiciary.

“It was within the context of this quality and feature of non-interference by the Buhari-led Federal government and for the avoidance of sub-judice that the Minister responded that high-profile cases were presented by the Federal Government for prosecution and the government came out with initiatives in its efforts to support speedy determination of justice.

“It was an innocent statement aimed at showing an re-enactment of a tripartite division of powers and responsibilities among the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary,” he explained in the statement.

Malami in emphasizing his belief in the principle of separation of powers also made reference to the decision of the Court of Appeal in Hon. Abdullahi Maccido Ahmad v. Sokoto State House of Assembly & Anor, (2002) 44 WRN 52 where the Court Per Salami JCA held inter alia that; “The doctrine of separation of powers has three implications: One is that, the same person should not be part of more than one of the arms or division of government;

“Secondly, one branch should not dominate or control another arm. This is particularly important in the relationship between (the) executive and the courts;

“That one branch should not attempt to exercise the function of the other.”