An Abuja-based legal practitioner, Maxwell Opara, has faulted the process that led to the disqualification of 34 judicial nominees over integrity concerns, insisting that the screening panel must come clean to earn public trust.
Naijaonpoint reports that Opara, who spoke on Tuesday during an interview on Arise Television, argued that the controversy surrounding the integrity test would persist unless the panel released the names of all applicants and clearly explained the criteria used in arriving at its decisions.
Reacting to reports that dozens of nominees failed the integrity test, the lawyer stressed that the credibility of the judiciary was central to correcting misconduct in governance and society.
“Well, this has been our position. That has been what we have been calling for, because we believe that when we get it right in the judiciary, we are there,” he said.
According to him, the conduct of politicians and public officers often mirrors their perception of the judiciary.
“Because when you see a politician or any Nigerian misbehaving, they have watched the position of the judiciary,” Opara added.
The lawyer questioned the secrecy surrounding the screening process, demanding full disclosure of those affected and the allegations levelled against them.
“A couple of days ago, we got information that some persons failed integrity test. Who are those persons that failed this test? Who wrote those petitions against them?” he asked.
He also queried the composition and activities of the panel that carried out the interviews.
“What were the petitions all about? Who are those that interviewed them? You should make it open. There is nothing secret about it,” Opara said.
Opara went further to suggest that the nominees who allegedly failed the integrity test may have been disadvantaged due to a lack of influence or connections.
“On my own, I may be wrong. I believe that those that purportedly failed the integrity test are those who have nobody to protect their interest in the panel,” he stated.
While admitting his position could be disputed, he challenged the panel to disprove it through transparency.
“I may be wrong, but for you people to prove me wrong, you need to come up and tell us who applied and who wrote petitions against who,” he said.
The lawyer maintained that even if the panel chose not to reveal the identities of petitioners, Nigerians were entitled to know the substance of the allegations and how decisions were reached.
“If you don’t want to disclose the persons that wrote the petitions, no problem, but let us know the facts and how you arrived that these are the integrity threshold. These are the criteria and he or she failed to meet up with the criteria,” he said.
Opara added that there was growing public suspicion that connections played a role in the outcome of the screening.
“Of course, personally and some other persons are also feeling the same that the people that were disqualified are those who have no connection with the members of the panel,” he noted.
He concluded by urging the panel to throw the process open if it truly wanted Nigerians to believe it acted fairly.
“So for the panel to prove to Nigerians that it did a good job, it needs to make everything open for Nigerians, because from the information I have, I think it’s only one or two persons that people wrote petitions against,” Opara said.