Thursday, 28th March 2024
To guardian.ng
Search
Breaking News:

Judiciary on hasty trial

By Armsfree Ajanaku
05 June 2016   |   3:12 am
Saddled with the task of interpreting the laws in an environment defined by an extreme brand of combative politics, the judiciary has always been in the eye of the storm.
Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami

Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami

Saddled with the herculean task of interpreting the laws in an environment defined by an extreme brand of combative politics, the judiciary has always been in the eye of the storm. Since the advent of Nigeria’s latest democratic dispensation in 1999, the courts have been called upon to intervene in the interminable maze of controversies spun by indecorous political competition. At this epoch in Nigeria’s democratic evolution, close watchers reasoned that the over-burdening of the Nigerian court system by matters emanating from politics would be a passing phase. It did not turn out to be so; increasingly, the courts became an arena for elitist battles for capture of state power.

Invariably, the power elite largely overwhelmed the court system with their interminable catfights over who won or lost elections. Despite the creation of Election Tribunals to adjudicate election disputes, the judges that manned the tribunals were seconded from the regular courts, with implications for the management of scarce judicial manpower. This overweening focus on disputes arising from elections took its toll in two forms. In the first place, it took critical attention away from the justice delivery system, and how well it was working to give justice to ordinary Nigerians.

As such, the adjudication of election disputes became the sole barometer for recording the achievements or failures of the judiciary. Therefore, when politicians who triumphed in election disputes were quick to glibly describe the judiciary as the “last hope of the common man,” they were only being clever by half. Appropriating the aspirations of the common man to create narratives for the sole purpose of grabbing power is one of the many frauds that have defined the rule of Nigeria’s rapacious political elite.

Secondly, the sheer amount of financial resources up for grabs in public office meant that politicians took it as one of their strategies to approach the court system with the intent of corrupting it. The same mindset with which the electoral process was dragged in the mud, was extended to the judicial process. So as the politicians suffocated the courts with cases around power tussles, they also created a fertile ground for corrupting of judges. The domineering role of politics in the push to compromise the judicial system, is one of the realities that concerned entities should be interested in understanding. That is important because the initial whispers that have now led to loud allegations of corruption against judges actually took their roots from the election tribunals.

In Osun State, for instance, the handling of the election dispute between Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola of the then Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) and Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), precipitated allegations of unethical practices against the tribunal Chair, Justice Thomas Naron. The Naron tribunal had to be disbanded, as it never recovered from the scandals revolving around unethical communication with one of the parties in the case.

The supreme irony in that case, however, is that both Aregbesola and Oyinlola are now on the same side of the political aisle, after the titanic battles they fought against each other. While the two political gladiators have moved on with their political careers, even to the point of raprochement, they have left the career of a judicial officer in tatters.

It was a similar case with Justice Ayo Salami, who was the President of the Court of Appeal when the cases emanating from the discredited elections of 2007 in Osun and Ekiti States got to their terminal points at the appellate court.

Soon, the infighting among senior officers in the temple of justice, including, the Chief Justice of the Federation, came to the fore. Salami had alleged that he was being prevailed upon by Justice Katsina Alu to influence the judicial outcome in the election matter from Sokoto State. This untenable situation degenerated to a point that the former President of the Appeal Court was promoted to the Supreme Court, only for him to turn down the elevation, describing it as a Greek gift. He was subsequently suspended; that was how the ambitions of the politicians succeeded in putting an abrupt and unsavoury end to the career of the jurist.

In the face of these developments, the National Judicial Council (NJC) did not always wield the big stick to impose judicial discipline. The result is that perception among Nigerians about the integrity of the judiciary and the judicial process is at an all-time low.

Since coming on board with a clear mandate to rein in corruption and graft, which have hobbled Nigeria’s progress, President Muhammadu Buhari has been trumpeting it that the judiciary is one of his major headaches in the war against corruption. The interminable length of time within which corruption cases drag has tended to spotlight a judicial process plagued by capacity constraints.

The recent indictment of some judges for allegedly receiving bribes from senior lawyers who are counsels in cases before them, point to a serious integrity deficit. The granting of conflicting judgments and laughable injunctions, have all been pin pointed as manifestation of the deep malaise in the judiciary. But by no means can the sweeping generalisations be made, as there are judges who have always lived above board. Unfortunately, the current narrative defined by the activities of a number of bad eggs, has tended to define the entire judiciary.

This is why the point has been stressed that beyond lampooning of the judiciary, attention must be focused on equipping all the critical stakeholders in the justice delivery chain to do their part. For instance, observers have pointed at the abysmal investigative capacities of some of the key prosecuting agencies, which tend to rush cases to the courts only for their cases to crumble like a pack of cards in the face of serious judicial scrutiny.

On the other hand, there are a good number of Nigerians who remain nostalgic about the first coming of Buhari as Head of State, when he deployed military tactics to give corruption a bloodied nose. In a democracy however, the State must become a bit more adept at engaging the judicial process. That means a lot of work would have to be done to support the work of relevant agencies.

In the end, there is no running away from the fact that the judicial system, its strengths and weaknesses are a reflection of the wider realities of Nigerian society. It is therefore not enough to single out the judiciary for lashing. The unsavoury manifestations of corruption and impunity cut across all facets of Nigerian life.

Injustice walks on all fours across the nation; to address these problems including the mind boggling scale of corruption would require a fundamental restructuring of the polity to deal a blow to the notion that might is right. Like in leadership, the conclusion can only be that a nation deserves the judiciary it gets.

It is only logical to come to terms with the fact that a nation that wants a good judiciary, must not think of it in isolation of other critical institutions. The nation must think in terms of creating a system that would produce decent policemen, committed teachers, forthright legislators, competent members of the executive, and a virile media amongst others.

0 Comments