Despite the convivial ambiance at the hallowed chambers of the Supreme Court of Nigeria, there are signs that several justices are unhappy with the state of things at the apex court.

Evidence of this disaffection showed in Justice Musa Dattijo Muhammad’s valedictory speech a few weeks back, where he upbraided the system for being abnormal in different areas, including the composition of the court, and alleged overbearing powers of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN).

Before now, 14 justices of the court led by the current CJN, Olukayode Ariwoola had, in an unprecedented memo leaked to the media, accused his predecessor, Justice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad of corruption and neglecting the welfare of the justices, a situation that forced him to resign.

These developments, many insist indicate an ominous silence among the sitting justices, even as it stirs a compelling need for the building of strong institutions that will not pander to the whims and caprices of strong men.

The fact that these justices bottle up so many niggling issues while still in service only to air them as their parting shots further illustrates the fact that their grievances could lead to implosion someday if the issues are not urgently addressed.

It is in this light that stakeholders fear that the posture of the traditionally taciturn justices may alter the tranquility of the court if their concerns are not urgently addressed.

Law scholar, Prof. Nnamdi Obiaraeri believes that the only way to avert implosion is by granting fiscal autonomy to the judiciary.

He said: “The tranquility in the Supreme Court is going to be ensured with the much-awaited fiscal autonomy of the judiciary as an independent arm of government.

“The Supreme Court remains the apex court and most sacred institution for justice in the country. To this end, at all times, the Supreme Court should be composed fully, being 21 justices drawn from varying backgrounds, including academics and representing the different geopolitical zones in the country.”

He noted that the ideologies of justices cannot be determined during their appointments as it is done in developed jurisdictions because those places have strong institutions unlike Nigeria with weak institutions.

For the convener, Access to Justice, Joseph Otteh, the over-concentration of power in the hands of the CJN has been particularly inauspicious and harmful to the integrity and reliability of Nigeria’s judicial appointment process, and possibly, decisions that have emerged from that process.

The CJN, he noted, presides over the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC) where persons recommended, or nominated for federal judicial appointments are made, after which selectees’ names are forwarded to the National Judicial Council (NJC).

“Afterwards, the CJN presides over the NJC which sits to approve decisions made by the FJSC. So, in essence, the CJN selects persons for judicial (or higher judicial offices) and approves the selection.

“Given that the CJN selects a super-majority of the membership of the NJC, the outcomes of any selection process are fated, with hardly anything safeguarding against poor, unmerited, or purely capricious selections. This is a ‘judicial autocracy’ and should never be permitted in a democracy!

“The situation also raises an important conflict of interest problem for the CJN. The NJC, which sits as an oversight body to interrogate selection decisions made by another body (the FJSC) as well as the process followed by it to arrive at its decisions, should not be chaired by the same person who presided over the body that made the initial recommendations.

“This harms public confidence in the system of judicial appointment and is clearly incongruous with the tenets of constitutional democracy, founded on the principles of checks and balances, and ensuring that power is not over-loaded on any one public office holder,” he said.

Otteh, however, suggested that until the constitution is amended, the CJN should, out of the inexorable need to avoid this conflict-of-interest situation, consider asking the next most senior justice of the Supreme Court, who is also a member of the NJC to preside over sessions of the NJC that approves candidates recommended by the FJSC.

Stephen Azubuike, a Lagos-based lawyer, sees issues raised by aggrieved justices as very critical, and requiring serious attention to avert implosion.

According to him, those critical issues were boldly amplified by Justice Muhammad in his retirement speech.

“All stakeholders in the justice sector must come together to chart a course for reforms in the judiciary. The Judiciary is one arm of government that must not be allowed to suffer deformity of any kind,” he declared.

Unhappy with Justice Muhammad’s exposé after spending 47 years on the bench, law professor, Edoba Omoregie (SAN) said the retiring justice did not suggest what to do to reform the system he railed against.

The judiciary, he said, is a human institution that nobody should expect to be any different from all other human institutions.

“However, it’s very unfair if anyone who questions the integrity of any institution, especially at the level of the Supreme Court cannot provide arguable grounds for the questions raised.

“He (Justice Dattijo Muhammad) spent inordinate time complaining about the vacancies on the Supreme Court bench. He tried to input politics into the issue. This is unbelievable. He appears to be suggesting that Supreme Court justices deliver opinions based on their regional interests, or does this suggest that perhaps that’s exactly how he conducted himself on the Supreme Court bench?

“On the whole, I find his valedictory speech beneath what’s expected of a very senior member of a consequential part of our institutional framework as a country,” he submitted.

Prof. Omoregie declared that the comments don’t seem to spring from genuine concern about alleged institutional decay, but from not being a direct beneficiary of what he considers spoils of office.

However, the don acknowledged that the CJN wields enormous powers as donated to the office by the constitution, adding that it needs to be checked.

His words: “This said, there’s no doubt that the powers of the CJN are enormous and ought to be subjected to controls. This will require constitutional alteration. This has been advocated many times before.

“For starters, the NJC should be abolished. I have made this suggestion before. It’s a surplus requirement in a federal system. It’s one of the unprincipled military legacies of our constitutional system, which was introduced in 1984 as the Advisory Judicial Council (AJC), by the military as part of the centralising propensities of the military, which has ruined our country.”

He suggested the retention of the FJSC at the federal level and the State Judicial Service Commission at the state level.

Toeing the same line of argument, the National Publicity Secretary of the Nigerian Law Society (NLS) and Convener of Fight Against Corruption in the Judiciary, Mr Bayo Akinlade, noted that judges lament about the bad state of the nation, the decay within the justice delivery system, and the inadequate welfare packages only when they are leaving the bench.

“We all know how bad things are with the judiciary. We don’t need to hear it from retiring judges and magistrates, and we certainly do not need to cry over spilled milk,” he teased, adding that many on the bench believe that they cannot speak out, or speak up about the challenges that they face while on the bench, wondering where they got the idea from.

The legal profession, he argued, is all about social engineering, reengineering, and protecting the weak against the overbearing powers of the strong, as well as maintaining societal balance.

Emphasising the overarching powers of the judiciary to make changes in society, Akinlade asked: “What in the world makes you think you can’t change the trajectory of the nation and the judiciary in particular with all the powers you possess as judges?

“Why would you think that the executive arm or the legislature has any hold over your independence or financial autonomy? You are in charge of your court. The cases that come before you are an opportunity to reinvent and redirect our nation’s economic and social pathways.

“Don’t be giving us excuses at your retirement and telling us how bad things are when you had many years on the bench to speak up and dispense justice. It is a lie that judges are only to be seen but not heard. Judges speak louder than anyone else. Judges speak up through their judgments, rulings, orders, and directives.

“If the police are messing up, throw a few in jail, if politicians are diverting your judiciary funds, make orders against the state and the Federal Government that will send shivers down their spines.

“The bench is only made up of lawyers, so why the fear of handling a few illiterate garage boys who managed to rig elections and get away with it?” He added.

Encouraging the judiciary to fix the societal ills to foster peace and tranquility, Akinlade lamented that Nigerians are tired of hearing how bad things are in both the judiciary and society.