ONJEH’s NJC OUTBURSTS: A MISPLACED OUTCRY ROOTED IN PARTISAN SENTIMENTALITY
In reaction to the Benue State Local Government Election Tribunal’s rulings, Comrade Daniel Onjeh, a known political ally of Governor Hyacinth Alia, launched a vehement criticism of the tribunal’s verdicts. However, a closer analysis of his statements reveals an outburst steeped in selective outrage, partisan sentiment, and a deliberate misrepresentation of judicial proceedings.
Onjeh’s call for the National Judicial Council (NJC) to intervene in the tribunal’s decisions comes as a surprising twist from someone who has, over time, remained conspicuously silent in the face of multiple attempts to undermine judicial independence in the state. Several civil society groups, including the Justice and Human Rights Advocates and the Centre for Judicial Integrity, have consistently documented threats and undue political pressure on the judiciary—particularly linked to the State Government. Yet, Onjeh never raised a voice.
Critics argue that this double standard exposes a politically motivated agenda masquerading as a defense of judicial integrity. “He only invokes the NJC when it suits partisan purposes,” said a legal analyst in Makurdi. “The silence over previous abuses makes this new-found judicial activism ring hollow.”
Onjeh’s rejection of the tribunal’s verdicts—especially those affirming the legitimacy of the Agada-led APC State Working Committee (SWC) and nullifying Governor Alia’s imposed caretaker structures—ignores the solid legal foundation of these rulings. The tribunal’s decisions were anchored on the constitutionality of internal party democracy and the rule of law, not political vendettas.
Legal observers maintain that the tribunal reinforced core democratic tenets by upholding only primaries conducted by the duly constituted APC leadership and declaring the meddling of the Benue State Independent Electoral Commission (BSIEC) unconstitutional.
“This is about enforcing legal order, not political witch-hunts,” said Barr. Nneka Ugwu, a constitutional lawyer. “It’s ironic that Onjeh would oppose rulings that actually strengthen democratic values.”
In another twist, Onjeh accused the Chief Judge of Benue State of violating the law by allowing waivers for security deposits in election petitions. However, such waivers fall within the administrative discretion of courts, particularly when they serve broader public interest and ensure access to justice.
Worse still, Onjeh’s criticism ignores a deeper scandal—the revelation of attempts by state actors to manipulate the NJC and influence outcomes of judicial reviews. Observers argue that Onjeh’s fixation on procedural technicalities is a smokescreen to divert attention from more substantive institutional concerns.
In his remarks, Onjeh also derided APC petitioners—many of whom were sidelined during the party primaries and denied fair hearing—as part of a wider conspiracy against the Governor. This narrative, critics say, is not only false but also dangerous.
Several advocacy groups, including the Middle Belt Christians Forum, have condemned the smear campaigns and threats targeting both judicial officers and petitioners. They assert that such intimidation tactics only worsen democratic backsliding in the state.
What emerges from Onjeh’s commentary is a portrait of a political actor more invested in shielding his allies than defending judicial integrity. His selective outrage, disregard for legal realities, and failure to denounce real threats to judicial independence raise questions about the true motivations behind his statements.
By casting Governor Alia as a victim while ignoring the Governor’s role in creating the legal crisis, Onjeh appears more concerned with party loyalty than constitutional order. His narrative, critics conclude, is less about justice and more about preserving the status quo.
As calls grow louder for the NJC and civil society to remain vigilant, one thing is clear, judicial integrity must not be sacrificed on the altar of partisan theatrics.
