RULAAC seeks disciplinary action over alleged retaliation against court staff

Chinedum Ukaegbu

Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre (RULAAC) has petitioned the National Judicial Council (NJC) over allegations of abuse of judicial authority, violation of due process, and intimidation of court staff within the Imo State Judiciary.

In a petition dated May 25, 2026, and addressed to the Chairman of the NJC in Abuja, the Executive Director of RULAAC, Mr. Okechukwu Nwanguma, called for an independent and transparent investigation into the alleged conduct of Hon. Justice V.O.B. Ekezie of the Imo State High Court.

RULAAC, a non-governmental organisation committed to promoting accountability, transparency, human rights, access to justice, and adherence to the rule of law, expressed concern over reports that two court clerks attached to the judge’s court were allegedly subjected to punitive judicial measures, including a reported seven-day imprisonment order.

According to the petition, the affected court staff were allegedly punished for refusing to respond satisfactorily to administrative queries and for allegedly providing Certified True Copies of court documents reportedly used in petitions filed against the judge.

The organisation stated that the staff members were accused of leaking court-related documents connected to complaints by litigants concerning the handling of a pending matter before the court.

RULAAC further claimed that the intervention of the Chief Judge of Imo State reportedly prevented the execution of the alleged imprisonment order.

The advocacy group argued that if the allegations are established, they would raise serious constitutional, ethical, and institutional concerns requiring urgent intervention by the NJC.

The group maintained that administrative queries issued to court staff are disciplinary mechanisms intended to obtain explanations regarding alleged misconduct or breaches of official duty and do not ordinarily constitute criminal offences warranting deprivation of liberty outside lawful criminal proceedings.

RULAAC noted that such actions, if true, may conflict with Sections 35 and 36 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), which guarantee personal liberty, fair hearing, and due process.

The organisation also expressed concern that judicial authority may have been used in a manner capable of creating the appearance of retaliation against subordinate staff allegedly linked to complaints or petitions against the court.

According to the petition, such circumstances risk undermining public confidence in judicial impartiality, restraint, and accountability.

RULAAC further stated that the alleged conduct may violate provisions of the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers, especially obligations requiring judges to uphold the law, exercise restraint, preserve the dignity of judicial office, and conduct themselves in ways that promote public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary.

“The judiciary occupies a unique constitutional position as the guardian of citizens’ rights and liberties. Judicial authority is strongest when exercised with restraint, fairness, and fidelity to due process,” the petition stated.

The organisation warned that the use or perceived use of coercive judicial powers in matters arising from administrative disagreements or personal displeasure could erode public trust in the justice system.

It also stressed that court staff, litigants, and lawyers should not operate under fear of retaliation for lawful complaints, administrative cooperation, or disclosure of official court records properly obtainable under the law.

RULAAC therefore urged the NJC to conduct an independent investigation into the allegations concerning the reported imprisonment order and treatment of the affected court staff.

The group also asked the Council to determine whether the alleged actions violated constitutional safeguards relating to personal liberty, fair hearing, and due process, as well as whether the conduct was consistent with the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers.

Additionally, RULAAC called on the NJC to take appropriate disciplinary or corrective measures where misconduct or abuse of authority is established.

The organisation further requested the Council to strengthen institutional safeguards against the misuse of judicial authority for intimidation, retaliation, or suppression of legitimate grievances within the judiciary.

RULAAC also urged the NJC to investigate circumstances surrounding Suit No. HOW/792/2022, including alleged prolonged delays in the matter, issues relating to the handling and reassignment of the case, and whether court documents allegedly used by litigants in petitions against the judge were obtained through lawful procedures.

The group reiterated its respect for the judiciary as a critical democratic institution but stressed that preserving its integrity requires prompt and impartial scrutiny of allegations capable of bringing the administration of justice into disrepute.

“We trust that the National Judicial Council will treat this matter with the seriousness and urgency it deserves in the broader interest of justice, institutional integrity, and the rule of law,” the petition added.