*Questions Why Accused Persons Cannot Engage SANs at Magistrate Courts While State Can Brief SANs to Prosecute, Says Discrimination Is Unconstitutional
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/2026-Summer-IDRI-Masterclass.jpg")
Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Olukunle Ogheneovo Edun, SAN, has delivered one of the most comprehensive and searing indictments of the Nigerian justice system by any serving member of the Inner Bar in recent memory, warning that the commodification of justice in Nigeria has reached a point where “things fall apart and the centre can no longer hold,” that non-state actors including area boys, thugs, militants, and community youths now operate parallel justice systems because the formal system has failed, and that the entire nation stands on the brink of collapse if urgent reforms are not implemented.
Edun delivered the paper titled “Justice for Sale: Who Truly Pays the Price?” as the lead paper at the 2026 NBA Benin Branch Law Week on Monday, June 2, 2026, addressing an audience of judges, lawyers, Senior Advocates, and members of the public in a presentation that moved from constitutional principles to real-world examples drawn from his own practice, from Supreme Court decisions, and from the daily experience of litigants and lawyers navigating a system he described as one where “the pursuit of justice has become an exclusive preserve of the affluent.”
Edun framed the crisis in stark terms from the outset, describing justice in Nigeria as having been transformed from an inalienable right into a purchasable commodity.
“This phrase is not merely a rhetorical flourish; it encapsulates a troubling reality where the sacred ideal of justice, the very bedrock of a civilised society, appears to have been commodified,” Edun stated.
He identified four manifestations of the phenomenon: bribery and judicial corruption involving direct or indirect attempts to sway judicial officers; forum shopping and procedural abuse through strategic manipulation of court jurisdictions; delay tactics designed to exhaust the resources of weaker parties; and unequal access to competent legal representation where wealth dictates the calibre of advocacy.
“If justice is indeed for sale, who, ultimately, bears the true, devastating cost? Is it the indigent litigant? Is it the conscientious lawyer pressured to compromise their ethical moorings? Or is it the entire society, whose collective faith in the rule of law gradually, yet inexorably, erodes, paving the way for anarchy?” Edun asked.
In what may be the paper’s most legally significant argument, Edun challenged the rule that Senior Advocates of Nigeria cannot appear at Magistrate Courts and other inferior courts, describing it as discriminatory and potentially unconstitutional.
“The Rule that SANs cannot appear at the Magistrate Court and other inferior Courts is this constitutional in view of the provision of Section 36(6)(c) of the 1999 Constitution entitling an accused person the right to a counsel of choice to defend him?” Edun asked.
He cited the Supreme Court’s pronouncement in Isiaka & Ors v. Ogundimu & Ors (2006) LPELR-1552(SC), where Justice Kutigi, JSC, held that “a litigant is free to engage counsel of his choice at any time and may equally terminate such engagement at any time.”
Edun then exposed what he described as a fundamental discrimination in the current system. He revealed that he himself had successfully argued before a Chief Magistrate Court that a Senior Advocate of Nigeria holding the fiat of the Attorney-General of State can prosecute matters before Magistrate Courts, in an unreported ruling in Charge No. MCOSU/64c/2024.
“The discrimination here is that if the grundnorm has given the State the freedom to brief a SAN to prosecute a Defendant, why should the Defendant not also be allowed to exercise his constitutional right under Section 36(6)(c) of the Constitution to also choose a legal practitioner of his choice?” Edun argued.
He expressed hope that the Supreme Court would have the opportunity to revisit the issue and set aside authorities like Bamigboye v. COP (2025) 1 NWLR (Pt. 1873) at 265-270, which upheld the restriction.
The argument strikes at the heart of access to justice. If the state can deploy Senior Advocates to prosecute accused persons before Magistrate Courts, but those same accused persons cannot retain Senior Advocates to defend them, the playing field is inherently unequal, the very embodiment of “justice for sale” that Edun’s paper critiques.
Edun addressed the popular Nigerian refrain “go to court,” reinterpreting it as a reflection of public cynicism rather than confidence in the judicial system.
“We are used to the popular refrain ‘Go to Court’ which actually is another way of saying that you will not get justice,” Edun stated.
He illustrated the point with a concrete example from his own practice. Suit No. FHC/CS/67/2023, Samuel C. Idoh & 17 Others v. Federal Government of Nigeria, relates to the dangerous Federal Highways in Delta and Edo States that have caused numerous accidents and deaths, including the Ologbo accident where a fuel tanker fell, locals went to scoop fuel, and fire engulfed them. More than three years after filing, the case is still yet to be heard.
“Of what use is it, if a businessman hires a lawyer to file a claim of N100 million against his debtors and five to eight years after getting judgment, he will have to endure another 10 to 18 years for the appeal up to the Supreme Court to run through before he can enjoy the fruits of his judgment, and that will be if he will still be alive, with the value of the money heavily depreciated,” Edun observed.
In one of the paper’s most alarming observations, Edun warned that the failure of Nigeria’s formal justice system has created a vacuum that is being filled by non-state actors operating their own parallel systems of dispute resolution and punishment.
“Public confidence in both the Bar and the Bench is eroding very fast and has led to the emergence of non-state actors as the new enforcers of morality and justice in our society: area boys, thugs, militants and community youths now run their own courts and administer their own version of swift justice, which in reality amounts to trial by ordeal, which is a criminal offence,” Edun stated.
He posed the practical question that makes the problem intractable: “But who will bell the cat? Who will have the boldness to arrest and charge a notorious misfit who may have political support and may decide to administer his own version of justice?”
Edun addressed the chronic problem of government and public officials disobeying court orders, describing them as “notorious” in their refusal to comply with judgments.
“They don’t really care what the Court says, as long as they are in power or office, the Court can make any order and they will never budge,” Edun stated.
He cited the case of former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello, who dissolved local government councils contrary to Section 7(1) of the Constitution guaranteeing democratically elected local government. The elected officials won at every level up to the Supreme Court, which ordered payment of their unpaid salaries and allowances within a specific time. “Sadly, the Supreme Court judgment is yet to be fully complied with,” Edun noted.
He also accused senior lawyers of complicity: “Lawyers, particularly senior lawyers, are culpable in advising their clients to frustrate orders and judgments of Court, thinking that it is smartness but without knowing that we are misusing our knowledge of law and procedure to frustrate the due administration of justice and by so doing, we are actually destroying the legal profession and the little public confidence still remaining in the judiciary.”
Without directly naming the ongoing controversy over the conflicting Federal High Court judgments on INEC’s election timetable, Edun addressed forum shopping as one of the key manifestations of “justice for sale.”
He described it as “the strategic manipulation of court jurisdictions or procedural rules to secure a favourable outcome, often at the expense of fairness and efficiency,” citing his own case at the Federal High Court, Warri, as an example of the type of procedural abuse that undermines public confidence.
Edun raised pointed concerns about the state of judicial precedent in Nigeria, questioning whether even the Supreme Court follows its own admonitions about the binding nature of its decisions.
He cited the Supreme Court’s decision in Centre for Oil Pollution Watch v. NNPC (2018), which expanded the frontiers of locus standi in public interest litigation. “We all thought it was good news but we in the human rights field celebrated too early. Both the Court of Appeal and the High Courts still strike out public interest lawsuits on the ground of lack of locus standi,” Edun observed.
He also noted that the recent Supreme Court decision in PDP v. Alhaji Sule Lamido (delivered April 30, 2026), which appeared to settle the question of what constitutes justiciable internal matters of political parties, was still “raising dust” because Justice Haruna Simon Tsammani, JSC, dissented.
Edun advocated for independent candidacy as a solution to the political party litigation crisis: “If independent candidacy is allowed by the Constitution, it will go a long way in reducing the madness we see around.”
Edun highlighted that financial autonomy for the judiciary, while a mandatory constitutional provision, remains unrealised in practice. “The Executive arm continues to subjugate the Judiciary and determine what they get and who gets appointed into the Bench,” he stated, arguing that true judicial independence requires not only protection from political interference but also adequate remuneration and welfare for judges.
In a practical reform proposal, Edun called for the decentralisation of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) to the six geopolitical zones, arguing that the current system where all disciplinary hearings are conducted in Abuja makes the process prohibitively expensive for most complainants and respondents.
“It makes no sense that a Petitioner and Respondent who are based in Benin should buy expensive flight tickets and book hotel reservations in Abuja, and this will be for several sittings. How many Petitioners can afford this expensive process?” Edun asked.
“The consequence is that aggrieved clients will leave erring lawyers to God to deal with, and frankly speaking, God may not,” he added.
Edun concluded by identifying the four layers of victims when justice becomes a commodity.
“The poor pay with their sufferings, their rights trampled underfoot. The legal profession pays with its integrity, its noble calling tarnished. The judiciary pays with its legitimacy, its authority questioned. The nation pays with its stability, its democratic foundations eroded,” Edun stated.
“A society where justice is for sale is a society on the brink of collapse, where the social contract is broken, and chaos looms,” the Senior Advocate warned.
Edun proposed a multi-pronged reform agenda including strengthening judicial independence and welfare through adequate remuneration, expanding technology and transparency through e-filing and electronic case management, ethical reorientation of the Bar through rigorous enforcement of professional conduct rules, enhanced access to justice through expanded legal aid and pro bono culture, and swift and consistent disciplinary action against erring judicial officers and lawyers.
He called on the NBA to lead reform efforts, protect judicial integrity, sanction unethical members, and advocate for systemic change with the legislature, executive, and civil society.
Closing with the words of Christopher Sapara-Williams, Nigeria’s first indigenous lawyer, Edun stated: “Lawyers live for the cause of the society and for the direction of humanity.”
The paper was delivered on June 2, 2026, at the NBA Benin Branch Law Week.
As an added bonus, every purchase comes with a FREE ebook titled: “AI in Legalpedia and Law Pavilion: A Research Guide.”
Ohio Books Ltd praises the publication, stating:
"....this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic."
How to Order:
📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878
📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com
🌎 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access it directly online at https://selar.com/prv626
______________________________________________________________________
“Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
The book, titled The Law of Torts in Nigeria: A Functional Approach, authored by Professor Hagler Sunny Okorie Ph.D and Ikeocha, Nathaniel Ngozi Esq, offers law students, practitioners, and academics a comprehensive guide to understanding and applying tort law in Nigerian courts. Interested buyers can place orders via the following contact numbers: 08028636615, 08037667945, 08032253813, or +234 902 196 2209.
_______________________________________________________________________
“Order Your Copy Now” — Basil Momodu, Esq. Unveils Second Edition Of His Book, "Civil Procedure In Nigeria"
According to the learned author, Basil Momodu Esq. "Law review is a continuum. We will continue to track changes in the law to enrich future editions." Recommended Booksellers: Lagos: 08033855230, Abuja: 08035991379, and others.
