The National Judicial Council (NJC) says it has not taken the final action on the 62 legal practitioners who applied for appointment as judges of the Federal High Court.
The NJC Secretary, Malam Ahmed Saleh, disclosed this in a statement on Thursday in Abuja.
Saleh stated that reports, which have been circulating recently in the media, was not a true reflection of what transpired in the appointment process.
He also clarified that all the qualification processes referred to in the earlier media report on judicial officers appointment took place entirely at the level of the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC).
“The reports that 34 of the lawyers failed an integrity test and were dropped from consideration for appointment were unauthorised by the NJC.
“No decision or action has so far been taken by the Council in respect of the candidates concerned.
“A few candidates were discontinued at the FJSC stage due to adverse findings arising from petitions submitted to the commission.
Others did not progress further because they failed to attain the required qualifying score to move to the interview stage before the NJC.
“There is no stand-alone or newly introduced integrity test that automatically disqualified candidates in bulk, as suggested by the reports.”
He said that the judicial appointment process remained structured, merit-based and multi-layered, involving written examinations, performance benchmarks, background checks, consideration of petitions where applicable, and interviews conducted in line with established guidelines.
Saleh expressed concern that the information could mislead the public and unfairly damage the reputation of candidates who participated in the process in good faith.
He said that the council has commenced internal investigations to identify the source of the unauthorised press statement and would take appropriate steps to safeguard the integrity and credibility of its procedures.
“The NJC reaffirmed its commitment to transparency, fairness, due process and the highest standards of judicial integrity, while pleading with media practitioners to always seek clarification through authorised channels before publishing reports on sensitive institutional matters”.
