Justice Rahman Oshodi of the Lagos State Special Offences Court in Ikeja, on Wednesday, dismissed an application filed by the former governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Godwin Emefiele, seeking the judge’s recusal from his trial.
In his ruling, Justice Oshodi stated that the allegations of bias raised by the defence were unsubstantiated and that there was no evidence to warrant his stepping down from the case.
The court maintained that judicial bias was insufficient to justify disqualification or recusal of a judge, as it must be personal or based on some judicial reasoning
Emefiele’s lead counsel, Olalekan Ojo (SAN), had asked Justice Oshodi to withdraw from the case, citing alleged bias, accusing the judge of allowing a leading question that the defence had previously objected to.
In response, the lawyer to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), argued that the proceedings had been conducted fairly and that the defence had failed to establish any factual basis for their claims of bias against the judge.
The former CBN boss was arraigned before the court by the EFCC alongside one Herry Omoile on allegations of accepting gratification, gifts through agents, corruption, and fraudulent property receipts.
The anti-graft agency also accused Emefiele of conferring corrupt advantage on his associates contrary to the Corrupt Practices Act 2000.
The defendants, however, pleaded not guilty to the charge.
In his ruling, Justice Oshodi noted that Ojo had made an oral application for the court to recuse itself due to alleged bias.
The judge clarified that the accusation stemmed from a ruling in which the court allowed a document, which the prosecutor had sought to admit as an exhibit, to be tendered for identification purposes.
The court later allowed the prosecution to question a witness (PW7) about the document, an electronic printout from the witness’s handset.
Considering various legal precedents on judicial bias, the judge concluded that bias is established only when a judge makes a personal comment on a matter—something the defence failed to demonstrate in this case.
He stated that to determine bias, there must be indications of a likelihood of partiality, and in this instance, no evidence of such bias had been presented.
“The allegations of bias have not been substantiated. Accordingly, the application of both the first and second defendants is refused,” the judge ruled.
Justice Oshodi also granted Emefiele’s request for permission to appeal the court’s decision made on January 8, which challenged the court’s jurisdiction to hear his case.
The case has been adjourned till May 26 for the continuation of the trial.
