37. It follows from the above that the existence or otherwise of a cause of action
is gleaned from the facts pleaded by an Applicant. Thus based on the facts before
the court, it is clear that there are issues that the court will need to determine one
way or the other which includes whether or not the Applicant’s right to fair
hearing has been violated and whether as alleged, his trial was fraught with
irregularities to wit non -compliance with rules on the composition of the
committee which has the potential to violate his right to fair hearing.
38. The Court is convinced that facts above is conclusive that the Applicant has
established a cause of action and so holds.
MERIT
39. Issue for determination.
Based on the facts before the Court, the following issues for determination were
formulated;
1. Whether the Applicant’s right to freedom from torture has been violated by the
Respondent.
2. Whether the Applicants right to fair hearing was violated by the Respondent.
3. Whether the Applicant is entitled to the reliefs sought.
40. Whether the Respondent violated the Applicant’s right to freedom from
mental torture
41. Applicant’s case is that following the deliberation on the petition against him
by the NJC on the petition of judicial misconduct against him, he was issued a
warning and placed on the watch list as an erring judicial officer. Further that the
subsequent publication of the conduct in the media exposed him to public
ridicule, odium and opprobrium and he received calls from both within and out
of Nigeria from well-wishers expressing concern. The Applicants concluded that
the anguish and pain occasioned by the Respondent’s publication amounts to
mental torture
42. The Court takes judicial notice of the fact that we receive many applications
from Complainants seeking relief for violation of freedom from torture,
particularly for mental torture for acts of the Respondent that allegedly cause
them pain and suffering, anguish and other emotional distress, with tendency to
ascribe any and all such pain and suffering as mental torture which to the Court’s
consternation is more often than not misplaced and often held unfounded.
12