Abstract:The head of the High Court of a State in Nigeria is known as the Chief Judge of the State. Section 271(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 provides that the appointment of a person to the office of substantive Chief Judge of a State shall be made by the Governor of the State on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council subject to confirmation of the appointment by the House of Assembly of the State. By virtue of section 271(4) of the Constitution, if the office of Chief Judge of a State becomes vacant or if the person holding the office is for any reason unable to perform the functions of the office, then until a person has been appointed to and has assumed the functions of that office, or until the person holding the office has resumed those functions, the Governor of the State shall appoint the most senior Judge of the State High Court to perform those functions. However, the Governor as the appointing authority and the National Judicial Council as the recommending authority, have always been at loggerheads over the latter`s insistence that the most senior judge in a State be appointed the substantive Chief Judge of the State. The position of the NJC is based on the convention within the legal profession, which places great premium on adherence to seniority and professional hierarchy. On the other hand, State Governors believe they possess a constitutional discretionary powers to appoint as the substantive Chief Judge of the State, any person qualified for such appointment, irrespective of whether such a person is or is not the most senior judge in the State. The insistence of the NJC that the convention pertaining to seniority must be respected, has more often than not, set the NJC on a collision course with various State Governors in Nigeria, usually leading to stalemates in the process of such appointments which, in turn adversely affect the smooth operations of affected State High Courts and the administration of justice in general. The latest of such conflicts was in Gombe State of Nigeria where the NJC insistence on seniority (conventionalism) and the Gombe State Governor’s insistence on constitutionalism has left the State without a substantive Chief Judge up to the time of this paper. This paper is the first part of a two-armed dispassionate examination of all issues surrounding this seemingly unending conflict, the aim of the authors being to expose the actual position of extant law on the subject with a view to recommending solutions founded on rule of law, realism and democratic constitutionalism. Using the scenario in Gombe State as a case study, and drawing from provisions of the National Judicial policy, the paper discusses the position of rule of law, and why religious adherence to the supremacy of rule of law is the best way out of the persistent logjam. The second part of this discussion, already concluded and sent for publication, is titled “Limits of the Recommending Powers of the National Judicial Council in the Process of Appointment of State Chief Judges in Nigeria: Gombe State as a Case Study”

Discretion in the exercise of jurisdiction in conflict cases in Nigeria

A Comparative Study of the Application of the Doctrine of Prosecuting Discretion in Japan,Germany and China

Resolving Office Establishment Dispute in Nigeria through Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanism: An Evolving Regime

Exploring Attempts at Judicial Resolution of the Nkonya-Alavanyo Communal Conflict in Ghana

Developing Jurisprudence or Creating Chaos?: An Examination of the Decisions of Ghana's Supreme Court on Property Rights of Spouses

Limitations of Discretion in Civil Retrial Procedure

The Convention-Constitution Standoff: Resolving the Most-Senior-Judge Conundrum in Appointment of Substantive Chief Judges for States in Nigeria

The Social Responsibility of a Lawyer in Nigeria: Duties in Respect of Legal Aid, Pro Bono and Access to Justice

Nonappearance and Procedural Delicacy: Some Observations on the Tribunal's Handling of Jurisdiction in the South China Sea Arbitration

Mixed Disputes and the Jurisdictional Puzzle in Two Pending Cases: Mauritius V. U.K. and the Philippines V. China

Analysis of the Jurisprudence of Article 58 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the Positions of West African Countries

THE ROLE OF DISCRETION IN SHIFTING THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN CIVIL CASES

Appraisal of the Jurisdictional Issues Confronting Prosecutors of Tax Related Disputes and Constitutional Bottlenecks

Conflict of Jurisdictions over Civil and Commercial Cases with Foreign Elements and Judicial Review

Tax Disputes Resolution In Nigeria: Going Beyound The Traditional Court And Administrative Resolution System

Judicial Intervention in International Commercial Arbitration: Implications and Recent Developments from the Indian Perspective

THE ROLE OF LEGAL PRACTITIONERS IN MITIGATING CORPORATE RISKS IN NIGERIA: A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF EXISTING LITERATURE ON THE STRATEGIES AND APPROACHES ADOPTED BY LEGAL PRACTITIONERS IN NIGERIA TO MITIGATE CORPORATE RISKS

Legal basis of restriction of constitutional human rights and freedoms in Ukraine

Revisiting Disqualification of Arbitrators During Arbitral Proceedings: A Critique of Toyoshima & Co., Ltd. V. Gaomi Luyuan Textile Co., Ltd.

The Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 and the Crime Suspect's Right of Silence: A Clog in the Wheels of Justice?

Experimenting with International Commercial Dispute Resolution