Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has formally challenged the reported summons issued to Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Honourable Justice John Tsoho, by Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) over alleged undeclared bank accounts, warning that such actions threaten judicial independence and violate the doctrine of separation of powers.
In a strongly-worded letter dated March 2, 2026, addressed to Chairman of CCB, NBA President Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN, argued that the bureau lacked constitutional authority to summon a sitting chief judge.
The letter emphasised that only National Judicial Council (NJC) was empowered to investigate or discipline serving judicial officers under the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
NBA noted media reports indicating that Tsoho had been invited to appear before the bureau to respond to allegations that he failed to declare certain bank accounts in his asset declaration form, allegedly, in breach of the Code of Conduct for Public Officers.
Describing the development as constitutionally troubling, NBA stated that any investigative or disciplinary process initiated against a serving judge without prior recourse to NJC would violate the doctrine of separation of powers.
The letter referred to Supreme Court’s ruling in FRN v. Nganjiwa (2022) 17 NWLR Pt 1860 407, which clarified that NJC must exercise disciplinary authority over judicial officers before any criminal or quasi-criminal proceedings could be initiated.
According to the NBA, the apex court established that NJC is “the ultimate guardian that guards the guardians of the constitution”, and that a serving judicial officer cannot face prosecution for alleged misconduct related to official duties without prior NJC sanction.
Any criminal proceedings initiated without NJC involvement, NBA said, was unconstitutional and null.
The association also cited opinions of Justices Ogunwumiju and Agim, who stressed that executive attempts to summon, arrest, or prosecute judges without recourse to NJC eroded judicial independence, intimidated the judiciary, and violated constitutional safeguards.
NBA described the summons, reportedly, issued to Tsoho as far more than a mere administrative interaction, stating that it constitutes the commencement of a process capable of culminating in sanction.
NBA said while allegations arising from purely private conduct might be handled directly by law enforcement, where allegations related to the exercise of judicial functions or professional misconduct connected to office, NJC must first determine the matter.
Any prosecution or investigative action against a serving chief judge without prior NJC consideration, NBA warned, was premature and unconstitutional.
Consequently, NBA urged CCB to withdraw the summons issued to Tsohoand, instead, refer any concerns to NJC for investigation.
The association further recommended that the bureau accelerate the digitalisation of its asset declaration system through a secure electronic portal to allow public officers to update prior declarations seamlessly, create an auditable trail, minimise errors, provide automated reminders, and enhance transparency, while safeguarding data integrity.
Citing Supreme Court decision in FRN v. Nganjiwa (2022) 17 NWLR Pt 1860 407, NBA said the apex court held, “It is the primary prerogative of the NJC to exercise disciplinary control over all judicial officers. Thus, the exclusion of the prior involvement of the NJC in any form of the exercise of disciplinary control (including criminal prosecution) over judicial officers negates the doctrine of separation of powers.”
NBA highlighted that the Supreme Court further ruled, “A serving judicial officer cannot be prosecuted for allegations of crimes… unless the NJC has first exercised disciplinary sanctions as a condition precedent,” and,
“No court in Nigeria can commence the trial of a serving judicial officer… unless the NJC allegations are first subjected to disciplinary sanctions.”
NBA also quoted Justices Ogunwumiju and Agim, emphasising the risks to judicial independence: “The institution of criminal proceedings by an executive agent of government against a serving judicial officer without first recourse to the National Judicial Council is unconstitutional, and the proceedings would be null and void and of no effect… The NJC acts as the buffer to protect serving judges from the whims and caprices of serving Presidents, Governors, and other principal Officers of the executive arm of government.”
The letter further stressed, “Where allegations arise from the performance of judicial functions or amount to professional misconduct connected with official duties, the NJC must first determine the matter before any further process can be validly undertaken.”
NBA warned, “Permitting the CCB or even the Code of Conduct Tribunal to proceed independently to investigate, summon, or even try Honourable Justice John Tsoho would, therefore, undermine the constitutional balance by allowing an external institution to initiate processes that properly fall within the supervisory domain of the judiciary.”
NBA urged CCB to, “Withdraw the summons issued to Honourable Justice John Tsoho and refer any allegation against him to the National Judicial Council for investigation and any necessary action to ensure that the independence of the judicial arm of government is not trampled on.”
The letter also suggested that the bureau, “Accelerate the digitalisation of its asset declaration system to enable seamless updating of prior declarations through a secure electronic portal… create an auditable trail of declarations and updates, reduce inadvertent omissions, provide automated reminders for periodic declarations, enhance transparency, while safeguarding data integrity… and minimise administrative disputes over compliance timelines.”
Copies of the letter were sent to Chief Justice of Nigeria, Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, and Tsoho.
Wale Igbintade
