By Yemi Oyeyemi, Abuja.
The National Judicial Council (NJC) has clarified that it is yet to take a final decision on the 62 legal practitioners who applied for appointment as judges of the Federal High Court.
The Council also stated that all qualification processes referenced in recent media reports were conducted solely by the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC), not the NJC.
In a statement issued on Thursday and signed by the NJC Secretary, Malam Ahmed Gambo Saleh, Esq., the Council described reports suggesting that 34 applicants failed an “integrity test” and were dropped as inaccurate and unauthorised.
According to the statement, the reports circulating in both conventional and social media did not reflect the true position of the judicial appointment process. The NJC stressed that no decision or action had so far been taken by the Council regarding the candidates.
The Council explained that while some candidates were discontinued at the FJSC stage due to adverse findings from petitions submitted against them, others did not progress because they failed to meet the required qualifying score to advance to the interview stage before the NJC.
It further clarified that there is no stand-alone or newly introduced integrity test that automatically disqualified candidates en masse, as widely reported.
“The judicial appointment process remains 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,” the statement said.
The NJC expressed concern that the publication of inaccurate and speculative reports could mislead the public and unfairly damage the reputation of candidates who participated in the process in good faith.
Consequently, the Council disclosed that it had commenced internal investigations to identify the source of the unauthorised information and would take appropriate steps to protect the integrity of its procedures.
The NJC reaffirmed its commitment to transparency, fairness, due process and high standards of judicial integrity, while urging media practitioners to seek clarification through authorised channels before reporting on sensitive institutional matters.
