Worldwide, the judiciary is the cornerstone of any democratic system but this cannot be said of the Nigerian judiciary, which is often criticised for partial judgments, lack of independence, corruption and delays, factors that have grossly eroded public confidence, Davidson Iriekpen writes
It is no longer news that the state of the judiciary in Nigeria is a cause of worry for many. Whether it is pre- or post-election litigations, civil or criminal prosecutions, Nigerians think that the courts have failed colossally in adjudication.
Frustrations have been expressed on numerous occasions, particularly due to the widespread corruption and inefficiency that have led to a significant erosion of public trust in legal institutions. The justice system is increasingly viewed as biased, slow and ineffective, leading to a reluctance to seek legal remedies for grievances. This disillusionment contributes to a culture of impunity, where individuals may resort to extrajudicial means to settle disputes, further undermining the rule of law.
Over the years, there has been an increasing reliance on the courts to adjudicate major issues of public interest, bringing the judiciary into the limelight. The conduct of judges—their independence, integrity, and impartiality in handling such cases—has come under intense public scrutiny.
Although the Constitution guarantees the independence of the judiciary, this principle faces serious challenges. Concerns about undue interference from other arms of government and financial autonomy have largely eroded that independence.
Section 17 (2)(e) of the Constitution provides that the independence, impartiality and integrity of courts of law and the easy accessibility to the courts of law shall be secured and maintained. The independence of the judiciary ensures that the judicial officials are free from any outside pressure or influence in the exercise of their judicial functions.
The judiciary is not to be subject to any authority other than the law that they are charged to uphold.
The Nigerian judiciary is often referred to as the last hope of the common man. But since the country’s return to civil rule in 1999, the institution is now facing growing criticism over its impartiality in judgment.
The judiciary is no longer a haven for the common man but a place where justice is only for the privileged, powerful individuals and high-profile politicians.
Perhaps the biggest challenge facing the judiciary is the slow pace of justice delivery. Cases can take years, even decades, to be resolved, which makes it difficult for ordinary citizens to seek justice and have their grievances addressed promptly. This undermines the credibility of the judiciary and puts a strain on the resources of the average citizen, who must bear the costs of legal representation and frequent court appearances.
Another issue is corruption within the judiciary. This has not only undermined the integrity of the justice system but also eroded public trust in the judiciary.
Moreover, there have been instances where judicial officers have acted in favour of the powerful or the highest bidder.
It was against this backdrop that the Sultan of Sokoto, Muhammadu Sa’ad Abubakar II, recently raised the alarm that justice in the country is fast becoming transactional, leaving the poor to suffer while the rich walk free.
Speaking as a guest at the Annual General Conference of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) in Enugu recently, the revered monarch told lawyers and judges at the event that corruption and inequality are weakening the very foundation of the nation’s courts. He lamented that justice in Nigeria has become a “purchasable commodity,” adding that the poor in the country are now victims while the rich do not face prosecution.
He equally regretted that the integrity of the judicial system was being undermined by corruption and inequality.
Also, former President Chief Olusegun Obasanjo recently passed a damning verdict on the nation’s judiciary, citing deep-rooted corruption and political interference as factors eroding public trust.
In his new book, “Nigeria: Past and Future,” the ex-president uncovered what he calls the judiciary’s “precipitous fall” from independence in 1960 to the current Fourth Republic. He contended that the reputation of the judiciary has steadily declined over decades, reaching a “lamentable” state in today’s democracy.
He warned that when justice is available only to the highest bidder, society faces “despair, anarchy, and violence” instead of fairness and order.
While drawing on personal observations, he recalled visiting a northern state about 10 years after leaving office, where a governor pointed out six duplexes allegedly built by a judge using funds acquired as chairman of election tribunals. Such examples, he claims, explain why politicians often distrust the electoral process.
Former Vice President, Professor Yemi Osinbajo, had faulted the persistent tendency of the courts to elevate procedural technicalities above the pursuit of substantive justice.
Speaking in Ilorin, the Kwara State capital, during the second Professor Yusuf Ali Annual Lecture, organised by the Kwara State University, Osinbajo, a Law professor, argued that the primary objective of any justice system should be to serve the people and uphold fairness, not to celebrate procedural rigidity or technical loopholes.
“The essence of justice is not in the form but in the substance. Unfortunately, many of our court decisions, including some of those delivered by the Supreme Court, tend to focus more on procedure rather than the core issues of justice,” he stated.
The former vice president warned that Nigeria’s fixation on outdated technicalities not only hinders the dispensation of justice but also erodes public confidence in the judiciary. While acknowledging that the Supreme Court has occasionally taken a more flexible stance, particularly in electoral disputes, he said inconsistency in the application of such principles remains a major setback.
Former President, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, last year criticised what he described as “politically motivated” court judgments in Nigeria, warning that such rulings undermine the country’s democratic process.
Speaking at the 67th birthday celebration and book presentation in honor of renowned lawyer Mike Ozekhome (SAN) in Abuja, Jonathan expressed concern over the impact of questionable court decisions on the stability of Nigeria’s democracy. He specifically referenced a recent judgment that allowed a ward chairman to expel a national officer of a political party, calling it destabilising to the political system.
“Considering the current state of the country, especially the judgments in political cases, we are beginning to see that democracy in Nigeria is unstable, like a cone turned upside down. If a cone is inverted, it cannot stand stably; even the slightest disturbance will cause it to fall,” Jonathan remarked.
From the admonitions above, it is imperative that concerned stakeholders should urgently take steps to reform the Nigerian judiciary. Perhaps, one of the first steps should be to improve the administration of justice so that cases are resolved more quickly and efficiently. Additionally, the National Judicial Council (NJC) should take steps to stamp out corruption within the judiciary by investigating and prosecuting judicial officers who are found to have engaged in corrupt practices and by increasing transparency and accountability within the judiciary.
For the period she will still be in office, the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, needs to rebuild the confidence of Nigerians in the judiciary. This, she has to do with courage in order to give them hope.
Leave a Comment