Daniel Otera
A quiet storm has been gathering within Benue State’s judiciary. What began as a flurry of petitions against the Chief Judge, Justice Maurice Ikpambese, has now escalated into a high-profile legal confrontation with the state’s Attorney-General, Fidelis Bemsen Mnyim, squarely at the centre of it.
The National Judicial Council (NJC), Nigeria’s top judicial regulatory body, has resolved to report Mr Mnyim to the Legal Practitioners’ Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) for his alleged role in a coordinated attempt to unlawfully remove the Chief Judge from office. According to the NJC, the actions attributed to the Attorney-General violate constitutional provisions and undermine judicial independence.
“Council was particularly concerned about the role of the Attorney-General of the State, Fidelis Bemsen Mnyim, Esq., in the scheme to remove the Chief Judge,” the NJC stated after its 109th meeting chaired by the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun.
The LPDC, empowered to discipline legal practitioners, will now determine whether Mr Mnyim’s conduct amounts to professional misconduct. If found culpable, he could face suspension or be disbarred, a rare but potent consequence for a sitting state Attorney-General.
The NJC revealed that Mr Mnyim personally authored one of three petitions filed against Justice Ikpambese. Two others, Guana Joseph and Terhemen Ngbea submitted similar petitions. Following its investigation, the Council dismissed all three as lacking merit.
“All the petitions presented against him were with the sole aim to remove him from his position,” the Council concluded.
This is not the first time Mr Mnyim’s conduct in office has triggered controversy. In October 2024, Governor Hyacinth Alia suspended him after he joined, on behalf of the state, a Supreme Court suit challenging the constitutional powers of Nigeria’s anti-corruption agencies including the EFCC and ICPC without the Governor’s prior approval.
“Governor Hyacinth Alia has directed the immediate suspension of the Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Fidelis Mnyim, for his role in joining a suit against anti-graft agencies without clearance from the Governor,” The Punch reported on 24 October 2024.
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) weighed in, criticising the Benue State House of Assembly for encroaching on the NJC’s constitutional role.
“The Constitution gives the NJC the exclusive power of exercising disciplinary control over judicial officers,” the NBA stated. “By purporting to recommend the Chief Judge’s removal, the Benue State House of Assembly exhibited crass knowledge of the Constitution.”
Appointed in March 2023 just weeks before the Alia administration took office, Justice Ikpambese has remained a key figure in an increasingly politicised judiciary. By February 2024, the state government formally recommended his removal, citing a litany of allegations, including bribery, financial misconduct, abuse of office, political interference, and incitement of judicial staff against the executive arm.
A fresh controversy emerged in April when Nigeria Legal Aid accused the Chief Judge of attempting to delay an appeal filed by the Benjamin Omale-led APC Unity Caretaker Committee. The move, they alleged, was intended to favour the Austin Agada-led faction of the party.
The group further claimed that Justice Ikpambese granted sick leave to judicial registrars responsible for receiving and processing the appeal, a development that conveniently stalled proceedings and handed political advantage to one faction.
Despite these controversies, the NJC cleared Justice Ikpambese of wrongdoing at its April 2024 meeting in Abuja. The Council maintained that all three petitions including the one signed by the Attorney-General lacked substance and were politically motivated.
“All the petitions presented against him were with the sole aim to remove him from his position,” the NJC reiterated in its official release on 25 April.
Benue is not alone in facing executive interference in its judiciary. Recent reports and legal assessments reveal a growing trend of political overreach in state judicial systems across Nigeria. The United World Congress of Diplomats (UN-WCD) recently expressed concern over what it described as “crooked court orders” and judicial manipulation in Benue, Rivers, and Osun States, warning that such developments undermine democracy and the rule of law.
Further analysis by civic groups has reinforced these concerns. In a 2023 post-election review titled “Judicial Capture and the 2023 General Elections”, the legal advocacy group Space for Change documented widespread incidents of forum shopping, conflicting court rulings, and pressure on judges across all 36 states. The report described the judiciary as increasingly vulnerable to political manipulation, particularly at the state level.
Additionally, a 2025 public perception survey conducted by the Human and Environmental Development Agenda (HEDA) revealed that a majority of Nigerians across the 36 states and the FCT view the judiciary as corrupt, inaccessible, and politically influenced. The report, based on over 1,300 respondents, cited concerns about judicial accountability and systemic executive interference.
Legal accountability watchdog SERAP also warned that governors in at least nine states, including Benue, have exerted unconstitutional influence over their state judiciaries through budgetary control, inducements such as official vehicles and housing, or the threat of removal.
According to SERAP, these actions contravene the independence guaranteed to the judiciary under Sections 81 and 121 of the Nigerian Constitution.
By dismissing the petitions and affirming Justice Ikpambese’s position, the NJC has sent a firm signal that constitutional procedure remains the gold standard.
“There are clear and unambiguous provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended, on discipline and appointment of Judicial Officers, vested in the Council, which were not adhered to in this case,” the NJC declared.
While the Council confirmed receipt of a formal petition against the Chief Judge, it insisted that no punitive action can be taken until the matter is investigated in accordance with due process and fair hearing.
“As far as Council is concerned, until the complaint is investigated and deliberated upon by it, Hon. Justice Maurice Ikpambese remains the Chief Judge of Benue State,” it concluded.
The Nigerian Bar Association also warned that any judge who accepts to serve as Acting Chief Judge under the current circumstances risks disciplinary measures.
“No judge should accept to be made Acting Chief Judge in defiance of the Constitution,” the NBA stated. “Doing so undermines judicial independence and sets a dangerous precedent.”