Former Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, NHRC, Prof. Chidi Odinkalu has asked Justice Sylvanus Oriji to recuse himself from suit No.CV/008/2026, Safwan Garba & Anor v. Jordan Wike at a high court in the Federal Capital Territory.
The suit, marked CV/008/2026, was filed by Safwan Garba GY and GY Global Oil and Gas Nigeria Limited against Jordan Ezenwo Nyesom-Wike, son of the FCT Minister, Nyesom Wike.
The suit followed allegations by the claimants in a $2.1 million land dispute between the parties.
Justice Oriji and the Wikes hail from the Obio Akpor LGA of Rivers State.
Odinkalu, in a post on X, said Justice Oriji should do the right thing by recusing himself from the suit.
He recalled a similar situation in 1983 when Justice Anthony Aniagolu recused himself from the panel constituted to hear the appeal the governorship case between Jim Nwobodo and Christian Onoh in the Anambra Election Petition.
“When the Chief Justice Sodeinde Sowemimo constituted panel of @SupremeCourtNg to hear the appeal in the governorship case of Jim Nwobodo v. Christian Onoh in the Anambra State election petition following the Anambra State governorship election in #NigeriaDecides1983, he had Anthony Aniagolu on the panel.
“On the day the panel convened to begin sitting, Aniagolu recused himself. He knew both parties well & came from the same neighborhood as Chief Onoh.
“I am rather impressed that this case involving serious allegations against the son of @GovWike has been assigned to a judge of @fcthighcourt, Sylvanus Oriji, who comes from Obio/Akpor LGA in Rivers State & who is reputedly related to the Wikes. Even if he wasn’t, he is well known to the Wikes & they come from the same neighborhood in Ohio/Akpor.
:Only a judiciary that is not interested in its credibility or in justice could possibly think that is proper, normal, or acceptable,” Odinkalu said.
He expressed shock that the Chief Judge of the FCT High Court assigned the case to Justice Oriji.
“Surely, he is not so innocent or so naive as not to know better,” he said.
Odinkalu also wondered why “the presiding judge should choose in these circumstances to accept to sit on this case.”
He further said that the constitutional standard of fair trial requires that the court should be ‘constituted in such a manner as to guarantee its independence & impartiality.’
“It is unlikely that having a judge with the genealogy of this particular presiding judge in this case meets the constitutional thresholds.
“The judge is in an impossible position. Whether the case succeeds or fails, extraneous factors will be imputed,” he insisted.
Odinkalu said he was surprised that the lawyers to the claimants have not asked the presiding judge to recuse himself from the case.
“In the circumstances, I am equally surprised that the lawyers for the claimants appear not to have not asked the presiding judge to recuse himself. That is an obligation of professional conscience in this case.
“This is not a case in which justice can be seen to be done as the court is presently constituted. It is not too late for the judge to do the right & proper thing & recuse himself,” Odinkalu said.
Leave a Reply