The National Judicial Council (NJC), at its 111th Meeting held on Tuesday, May 13, 2026, under the Chairmanship of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Hon. Justice Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun, GCON, has suspended two judges for one year without pay for judicial misconduct involving breaches of the Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers, while also rejecting the appeals of eight compulsorily retired judges of the Imo State Judiciary who had sought a reversal of sanctions imposed on them for falsifying their ages in official records.
The Council, however, reinstated one judge Hon. Justice T.I. Nze of the Imo State Customary Court of Appeal after he presented new evidence that the NJC’s review committee found to be authentic.
Justice Shekarau: N7 Million Ex Parte Order
The Council suspended Hon. Justice Ibrahim D. Shekarau of the High Court of Nasarawa State for one year without pay for judicial misconduct involving the grant of an ex parte order in breach of Rules 3.1, 3.3 and 3.5 of the Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2016.
The suspension followed a petition filed by Oluwafunke Obale Ozozoma over proceedings in Suit No. NSD/MG56M/2025. In her petition, Ozozoma alleged that Justice Shekarau granted an ex parte order directing the transfer of N7 million from her bank account to a third party as a purported reversal of funds.
The petitioner contended that the ex parte application was filed, heard, and granted on the same day — an extraordinarily swift judicial process that raised immediate concerns about due process. She further alleged that there was no substantive suit pending before the court at the time the ex parte order was made, meaning that the order was granted in a procedural vacuum without the foundation of any underlying legal action.
Ozozoma also alleged that the order wrongly implied her involvement in fraud, despite the fact that she had never been charged with any offence or made a party to any proceedings. She contended that the judge failed to verify the alleged erroneous transfer before making the order, effectively authorising the removal of N7 million from her account on the basis of an unverified, one-sided application by a third party.
The NJC’s investigation committee examined the petition and the circumstances of the order and reached damning conclusions. The committee found that Justice Shekarau acted in bad faith, failed to observe due process, and demonstrated a lack of professional competence. These findings formed the basis for the one-year suspension without pay.
The breach of Rule 3.1 relates to the requirement that judicial officers uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary. Rule 3.3 requires that judicial officers afford every party to proceedings a reasonable opportunity to be heard, which was plainly violated by the grant of an ex parte order that directly affected a person’s bank account without notice to her. Rule 3.5 requires judicial officers to be patient, dignified, and courteous in their dealings with litigants and to ensure that proceedings are conducted fairly.
Justice Okpe: Committal Without Fair Hearing
Similarly, the Council suspended Hon. Justice Edward A.E. Okpe of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory for one year without pay over allegations of breach of fair hearing in a matrimonial case.
The decision followed a petition filed by Mr Sunday Emmanuel Oso, who accused Justice Okpe of bias and denial of fair hearing in Suit No. FCT/HC/PET/529/2024 between Lateefat Adeola Oso and Sunday Emmanuel Oso.
In his petition, Oso alleged that although he was served hearing notices fixing the matter for September 19, 2024, the court proceeded to hear and grant an ex parte application on September 17, 2024 — two days before the scheduled hearing date — without any notice to him whatsoever. This meant that the judge entertained and ruled on an application that directly affected the petitioner without his knowledge, at a time when he reasonably believed the next court date was still two days away.
The consequences of the ex parte order proved severe for the petitioner. Oso further alleged that when the matter subsequently came up on the scheduled date, Justice Okpe declined to hear his Motion on Notice — which would have given him the opportunity to present his side — and instead entertained committal proceedings against him based on his alleged disobedience of the earlier ex parte order. In effect, the petitioner was being held in contempt of an order that was made behind his back, without his knowledge, and before he had any opportunity to be heard.
The NJC’s investigation committee found that Hon. Justice Okpe granted an ex parte application that led to committal proceedings against the petitioner without affording him the opportunity to be heard, contrary to Rule 3.3 of the Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2016.
The right to fair hearing is one of the most fundamental principles of Nigerian law, guaranteed by Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution. The use of ex parte orders to create a foundation for committal proceedings against a party who was never heard strikes at the heart of this constitutional guarantee. The NJC’s decision to impose a one-year suspension without pay reflects the gravity with which the Council views such breaches.
Eight Imo Judges Lose Appeals Over Age Falsification
In a separate but equally significant disciplinary action, the NJC rejected appeals filed by eight judges of the Imo State Judiciary who had been compulsorily retired from service for age falsification and related misconduct.
The eight judges had sought a reversal of the sanctions imposed on them, but the Council found that they failed to present fresh evidence capable of justifying a reversal of their compulsory retirement.
The judges whose appeals were rejected are: Hon. Justice B.C. Iheka; Hon. Justice K.A. Leaweanya; Hon. Justice Okereke Chinyere Ngozi; Hon. Justice Innocent Chidi Ibeawuchi; Hon. Justice Ofoha Uchenna; Hon. Justice Everyman Eleanya; Hon. Justice Rosemond Ibe; and Hon. Justice T.N. Nzeukwu.
The affected judges were among ten judicial officers recommended for compulsory retirement at the Council’s 109th Meeting held on June 25, 2025. That meeting had uncovered a pattern of systematic age falsification within the Imo State Judiciary, with nine of the ten judges found to have altered their dates of birth in official records to unlawfully extend their years in service beyond the mandatory retirement age.
By altering their dates of birth, the affected judges had effectively remained on the bench longer than the Constitution and the law permitted, collecting salaries and emoluments, presiding over cases, and delivering judgments during a period when they should have been out of service. The implications for the cases decided by these judges during their unlawful extension of service remain a matter of legal concern.
The tenth judge, Hon. Justice T.N. Nzeukwu, was sanctioned for a different form of misconduct. He was found to have made himself available to be sworn in as Acting Chief Judge of Imo State despite being fourth in the hierarchy of judges in the state, contrary to Section 271(4) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended). That constitutional provision governs the appointment of Acting Chief Judges and establishes a seniority-based order that Nzeukwu was found to have circumvented by making himself available for the role ahead of three judges who were senior to him.
In a notable exception to the Council’s hard line on the Imo disciplinary cases, the NJC reinstated Hon. Justice T.I. Nze of the Imo State Customary Court of Appeal. Justice Nze had been among the ten judicial officers recommended for compulsory retirement at the 109th Meeting in June 2025.
However, at the 111th Meeting, Justice Nze presented new evidence to the review committee which the committee examined and found to be authentic. On the strength of this new evidence, the Council reversed his compulsory retirement and reinstated him to the bench.
The NJC did not disclose the specific nature of the new evidence presented by Justice Nze, but the reinstatement suggests that he was able to demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the review committee, that the basis for his original sanction was either erroneous or supported by information that has since been contradicted by more reliable evidence.
The disciplinary actions taken at the 111th Meeting send a strong message on two fronts. The suspension of Justices Shekarau and Okpe underscores the NJC’s zero tolerance for the abuse of ex parte orders — a recurring source of complaint in Nigeria’s judicial system. Ex parte orders, by their nature, are granted without hearing from the other side, and are intended to be used sparingly and only in circumstances of genuine urgency. When judges use ex parte orders to transfer money from a person’s bank account without verification, or to create a basis for committal proceedings without affording the affected party a hearing, the resulting injustice is acute and immediate.
The rejection of the eight Imo appeals reinforces the NJC’s position that age falsification by judicial officers is a fundamental breach of integrity that strikes at the credibility of the entire judiciary. The Council’s refusal to reverse the sanctions, combined with its finding that the affected judges failed to present fresh evidence, effectively closes the door on their return to the bench.
The lone reinstatement of Justice Nze, meanwhile, demonstrates that the Council remains open to reviewing its decisions where genuine new evidence emerges, ensuring that disciplinary rigour does not come at the expense of fairness.
The NJC’s press release was signed by Kemi Babalola-Ogedengbe, Esq., Deputy Director, Information, National Judicial Council.
