A former employee of the ECOWAS Court of Justice (ECJ), Temitope Obasaju Stephen, has approached the Court with an application for the enforcement of an alleged violation of his fundamental human rights, particularly his rights to work and gainful employment by the Court, contrary to Article 33 of its own rules.
He says the alleged violation of his rights is contrary to Article 23(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; Article 6 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and Article 15 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
Consequently, Temitope is seeking the relief of the ECJ to order his immediate reinstatement and payment of all his salaries and entitlements for the period starting the date of extensions of all the Judges contracts until the new office holders take over.
According to Temitope, he was employed in 2018 as an Executive Assistant to a Nigerian Judge of the Court, with the express provision that his employment would end at the expiration of the tenure of the Judge. He is alleging in the suit that his employment was terminated midway and he did not get any opportunity of going through a disciplinary process.
Additionally, he is seeking the relief of the ECJ to guarantee his continued employment with the Court following the extension of the tenure of the judge – an extension only at the discretion of his employer, the judge.
Our correspondent’s investigations into the matter have however revealed that Temitope’s suit has not been perfected to enable the Court schedule it for hearing.
The procedures for filing applications before the ECJ, stipulates a reviewing tray where applications are considered on merit and fitting into established templates of bringing applications before the court. These processes last between two to three months.
According to a senior lawyer who spoke with our correspondent on conditions of anonymity, from his first review of the application, it may not scale the merit scrutiny of the Court as it was being wrongly treated as a human rights violation instead of a staff matter that should go through the administrative procedure for Community staff. He wondered why a lawyer, who was at a point involved in writing legal opinions for a judge, would bring such an application and proceed to launch sub judicial comments against the Court ostensibly for delaying the case.
According to the senior lawyer, staff matters in ECJ are subject only to the ECOWAS Commission Staff Regulations, which provides the proper procedure for handling staff matters.
He said Temitope’s application fell on the scrutiny of common sense. “How can he allege violation of his human rights when that was availed to him when he was employed to work as an Executive Assistant to the Nigerian Judge” but failed in rendering competent services to his boss resulting in his redeployment on compassionate grounds pending the expiry of his term as contained in his letter of employment.
Our correspondent further learnt from insider information at ECJ that, Temitope has received several competence queries over poor legal research and advice to his boss. Accordingly, it was confirmed that his boss, requested his removal from his position.
Sources at the ECJ said that it was only in the bid to provide some soft landing for Temitope that instead of his outright sack, he was moved to the research and documentation directorate of the ECJ to enable him serve the remaining period of his tenure of employment, dated to end in August 2022, at the expiration of the tenure of his original boss, exactly what happened in September this year.
According to the senior lawyer in Abuja who spoke to our sources on Temitope’s application and claims, his bogey claim that his tenure is tied permanently to the term of his initial boss has no merit. In the learned view of the senior lawyer, his engagement by ECJ for the Nigerian Judge was specific to the initial term of his boss. He also said he is not a staff of the ECJ approved by the ECOWAS Commission, rather, an aide appointed to support a statutory appointee for a specific period.
As a result, the senior lawyer said, “his appointment is not a siamese twin to the appointment of the Nigerian Judge,” adding that “his appointment ends at the completion of his tenured employment, subject only to a renewal at the recommendation of his boss based on his the competent discharge of his tasks and roles,” which he did not attain.
On Temitope’s claim that a letter of disengagement should be written to him, stating clearly reasons for his disengagement by the ECJ, our correspondent gathered from the Abuja based lawyer that, “nothing can be more presumptuous, his contract specifically stated when his tenure of engagement by the ECJ ends, why seek a non-existent expectation, all that happens usually is that the administration department will request him to sign the end of contract documentations which will show his severance entitlements and that’s it”
“It will be interesting to see how this application survives the scrutiny of ECJ and the rigors of staff regulations in the ECOWAS Commission,” the lawyer said.
The lawyer wondered why Temitope will indulge in prejudicial comments and a “vicious media campaign that smacks of desperation on the case, including expecting the Court to suspend action on his employment without a Court order.
Moreso, the lawyer wondered why Temitope will go off tangent by commenting on the recruitment of staff of the Court that has no “bearing with the case but a pathetic attempt to besmirch the court.’
“I understand that interview of the staff mentioned in his press campaign are handled by an inter-institutional committee of Heads of ECOWAS institutions and the process handled by an external consultant,” the lawyer concluded.
By Our Correspondent