Ethics, Accountability, And Value Re-Orientation In The Judiciary: Towards Strengthening Public Trust And Judicial Integrity

By Professor Abiodun Amuda-Kannike SAN

ABSTRACT

The judiciary remains the cornerstone of democracy, the guardian of the Constitution, and the last hope of the common person. While challenges of ethics, accountability, and value orientation persist, it is equally important to recognise the significant strides, sacrifices, and achievements of Nigerian judicial officers. This paper examines ethics, accountability, and value orientation in the Nigerian judiciary through a balanced lens that acknowledges both institutional weaknesses and notable strengths. The paper adopts a doctrinal research methodology, relying primarily on primary sources including the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, the Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers (2016), the National Judicial Policy, and judicial decisions, as well as secondary sources such as legal literature, newspaper reports, and official statements from judicial officers and stakeholders. The objectives of the paper are to examine the ethical and accountability frameworks governing the Nigerian judiciary, assess both the challenges and prospects for upholding ethics and accountability, and propose reforms that build on existing institutional strengths. The major findings reveal that while the Nigerian judiciary has demonstrated remarkable courage in defending democracy, protecting human rights, and developing progressive jurisprudence—particularly during the military era and through recent electoral jurisprudence—significant challenges persist, including delays in adjudication, inadequate funding and infrastructure, corruption concerns, political interference, technological deficiencies, and growing disregard for court orders. The paper also finds that the National Judicial Council has shown increased commitment to accountability through disciplinary actions against errant judicial officers, and that recent reforms under the current Chief Justice of Nigeria have strengthened institutional integrity. The major recommendations include strengthening ethics education and value re-orientation, enhancing judicial accountability mechanisms, improving judicial welfare and working conditions, accelerating technological innovation, addressing lower court challenges, reforming judicial appointment processes, recognising and rewarding excellence, ensuring adequate funding and financial autonomy, and shortening election petition timelines. The paper concludes that the judiciary is indispensable to Nigeria’s democracy and that reform must build on existing strengths while addressing identified gaps. The journey of reform is long, but the destination is worth every effort.

Keywords: Accountability, Ethics, Judiciary, Judicial Integrity, Rule of Law, Value Re-Orientation

1. INTRODUCTION
   • The Burden and Honour of the Bench

To sit on the bench is to carry the weight of a nation’s conscience. Judicial officers daily make decisions that affect life, liberty, property, and reputation. This is a sacred trust.[1] The Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, captured this when she reminded lawyers that the legal practitioner is entitled to fair remuneration, but the acceptance of briefs must ultimately be guided by conscience, professional responsibility, and fidelity to justice.[2] She further noted that the long-term reputation of the legal profession depends not merely on success, but on ethical integrity, intellectual honesty, and unwavering commitment to the rule of law.[3] When former Vice President Yemi Osinbajo spoke at the 2026 Annual Conference of the Nigerian Bar Association Section on Legal Practice, he described judges and lawyers as “guardians of the scale” and reminded them that the judiciary’s credibility depends not only on legal correctness but also on transparency, consistency, and clarity in judicial reasoning, particularly in politically sensitive cases.[4]

Public criticism often focuses on negatives. Yet the judiciary has produced landmark judgments, defended democracy, and upheld rights under difficult conditions. Stakeholders have noted that public confidence in the judiciary has fluctuated over the years, fueled by allegations of corruption, conflicting court orders, delays in justice delivery, and controversial election judgments.[5] Pastor Tunde Bakare, at the 22nd Chief Gani Fawehinmi Annual Lecture, decried what he described as the growing perception of the judicial bench as a “means of livelihood,” pointing to political intrusion in judicial appointments and contradictory court judgments as major symptoms of a failing system.[6] He warned that without integrity-driven reforms by both lawyers and judges, the country risks remaining trapped in what he termed continued national “bondage.”[7]

However, a UNODC and National Bureau of Statistics survey has found the judiciary to be the recipient of the highest per capita rates of bribery, ahead of both the Nigeria Police Force and the Nigerian Customs Service.[8] This has caused incalculable damage to the institutional credibility and authority of the judiciary. Yet, as Ejiofor has recently argued, the profession has an illustrious past with contributions from icons such as Justice Chukwudifu Akunne Oputa, Justice Kayode Eso, and Muhammad Bello CJN (Rtd) and it is possible to revive the culture of excellence that once defined the Nigerian Bar.[9]

Accordingly, the objectives of this paper is to examine ethics, accountability, and values in the judiciary, assess both challenges and prospects to upholding ethics, accountability and values in the judiciary, and to propose reforms that build on existing institutional strengths supporting ethical and accountability values in the judiciary.

2. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
   • Judicial Ethics

Judicial ethics refers to the standards of conduct expected of judicial officers. These include independence, impartiality, integrity, propriety, equality, competence, and diligence.[10] The Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, has emphasised that these principles must guide judicial conduct at all times, both within and outside the courtroom, and that the legitimacy of judicial authority depends not only on the correctness of decisions but also on public confidence, which is sustained in large measure by the ethical conduct of judicial officers.[11]

2. • Accountability

Accountability means judges must answer for their conduct and decisions, not in the sense of political responsiveness, but in terms of transparency and adherence to the law. The NJC has demonstrated this through its disciplinary functions. At its 110th meeting in January 2026, the Council reviewed 39 petitions against judicial officers, dismissing 26 for lack of merit, ordering further investigation into seven, and issuing cautions to two judges.[12] This shows the system has internal checks, though critics argue that more transparency is needed.

• Value Re-Orientation

Value Re-orientation in the judiciary encompasses the moral and philosophical principles that guide judicial decision-making. These include fidelity to the Constitution, respect for human dignity, protection of fundamental rights, and commitment to the rule of law. Justice Kekere-Ekun has outlined that judicial ethics encompass a disciplined adherence to independence, impartiality, integrity, propriety, equality, competence, and diligence.[13]

• Judicial Virtue

Judicial virtue includes courage, temperance, wisdom, and justice. The so-called “golden era” of the Nigerian Supreme Court with justices like Kayode Eso, Chukwudifu Oputa, Otutu Obaseki, and Chuwkueneike Idigbe exemplified these virtues. These justices had their strength not only in law but also in humanities such as Classics and Philosophy, which brought a unique depth to their judgments. They gave interpretation to the new Presidential Constitution of 1979, establishing principles that continue to guide constitutional interpretation, and they stood their ground in protecting the civil liberty and rights of Nigerians even under a very difficult military regime.[14] Justice Kayode Eso has been described as the architect of judicial activism in Nigeria, an advocate of an independent judiciary, and a “deacon of integrity, honour, justice and uprightness.”[15]

These are daily demands on “my Lords.” President Bola Tinubu reminded judges that their actions define the moral strength of the Republic, and that “corruption in any arm of government weakens the nation, but corruption in the judiciary destroys it at its core.”[16] He further declared that “justice must never be for sale” and that the Bench must never become “a sanctuary for compromise.”[17]

3. THE GOOD SIDE: ACHIEVEMENTS AND STRENGTHS OF THE NIGERIAN JUDICIARY

Despite the challenges outlined above, the Nigerian judiciary deserves commendation in several critical areas. This section highlights the strengths upon which meaningful reform must be built.

3. • Defender of Democracy

In cases like Buhari v INEC[18] and Amaechi v INEC[19], the courts reshaped electoral law and established important precedents for the conduct of elections. During military rule, judges like Justice Kayode Eso, Justice Chukwudifu Oputa, Justice Otutu Obaseki, and Justice Chuwkueneike Idigbe stood firm. These were the jurists who gave interpretation to the new Presidential Constitution of 1979, establishing principles that continue to guide constitutional interpretation.[20]

The Supreme Court’s decision in Military Government of Lagos State v Ojukwu[21] remains a landmark. The government had forcibly evicted Ojukwu from a property while a matter was pending in court. The Supreme Court descended heavily on the government, declaring that once a matter is submitted to the court for adjudication, even if a restraining order has not been granted, the status quo must be maintained.[22] This judgment reaffirmed that even under a military regime, the rule of law still applies.

The case of Garba v University of Maiduguri[23] also became a “locus classicus” that saved hundreds of students from expulsion by university administrators acting under military pressure. The Federal Civil Service Commission v Laoye[24] case also established that when somebody is facing a criminal allegation, an administrative panel cannot try that criminal offence. Rather, the case must go to the regular court for trial.

• Protection of Human Rights

In Fawehinmi v IGP[25], the courts affirmed freedom of speech. In Abacha v Fawehinmi,[26] the courts voided military decrees inconsistent with fundamental rights. Daily, judges grant bail, enforce fundamental rights, and check executive excess.

The human rights jurisprudence developed during the military era provided a lifeline for citizens. The courage of judges in granting habeas corpus applications and protecting citizens from arbitrary detention remains a proud legacy. Ogunye noted that judges of the golden era “stood their ground in protecting the civil liberty and rights of Nigerians even under a very difficult military regime.”[27]

• Development of Jurisprudence

Nigerian judges have developed doctrines in commercial law, environmental law, and constitutional law that are cited across Africa. The Supreme Court’s decision in INEC v PDP[28] show intellectual depth.

The Justices of the Supreme Court gave interpretation to the new Presidential Constitution of 1979. Nigeria was practising a parliamentary system of government before Obasanjo introduced the presidential system, an American model. There were not constitutional cases before that era. So, there was no precedent to rely on as far as the presidential model was concerned. It was these Justices that first gave interpretation in cases such as AG Bendel State and the AG Federation,[29] AG of Ogun State and AG of Federation.[30]

Justice Kayode Eso has been described as the architect of judicial activism in Nigeria, an advocate of an independent judiciary, and a “deacon of integrity, honour, justice and uprightness.”[31] His dissenting voice in the celebrated case of Awolowo v Shagari, holding that at least two-thirds of 19 states could only be 13 and not 12 2/3, remains a subject of scholarly discussion.[32]

• Institutional Integrity of Many Judicial Officers

Thousands of judges serve with diligence, modest means, and integrity. They work under pressure, poor facilities, and threats, yet deliver judgments. The National Judicial Council (NJC) has also sanctioned erring officers, showing the system has internal checks.

Between 2016 and 2023, the NJC received hundreds of petitions and sanctioned several judges. Under Justice Kekere-Ekun’s leadership, the NJC has become more proactive. At its 110th meeting in January 2026, the Council reviewed 39 petitions against judicial officers, dismissing 26 for lack of merit, ordering further investigation into seven, and issuing cautions to two judges.[33] At its 111th meeting, the Council invoked its disciplinary powers against 256 judicial officers who were queried for various performance-related issues, suspending two judges for one year without pay, and rejecting appeals by eight compulsorily retired judges from Imo State.[34]

The NJC also adopted a landmark policy affirming the eligibility of retired public servants for judicial appointments.[35] These actions show that the system is not passive and that judicial misconduct is not ignored.

• Judicial Independence Secured Constitutionally

Sections 17, 36, 121, and 231 of the 1999 Constitution protect tenure, remuneration, and removal process. This was won through sacrifice. The CJN has defended this independence practically. In Imo State, the CJN intervened when the Governor attempted to bypass constitutional seniority in appointing an Acting Chief Judge. In Benue State, she halted an unlawful move by the House of Assembly to remove the State Chief Judge.[36] These interventions send a powerful signal that under her watch, constitutionalism and due process will not be sacrificed at the altar of political expediency.

President Tinubu reaffirmed this independence, stating that the three arms of government must remain united by purpose, even when separated by function.[37] He further acknowledged that “whenever Nigeria has faced moments of uncertainty, history has recorded that the Judiciary stood firm as the stabilising force of our national life.”[38]

4. THE NEXUS: ETHICS, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND VALUES

Ethics, accountability, and values are interconnected. A value-driven judiciary produces ethically sound judgments. Accountability ensures that values are not mere rhetoric but lived reality.

The “good side” flows from values. When judges like Justice Kayode Eso and Justice Chukwudifu Oputa stood against military dictatorship, it was because they valued justice and liberty more than personal safety. Justice Eso has been described as the architect of judicial activism in Nigeria, an advocate of an independent judiciary, and a “deacon of integrity, honour, justice and uprightness.”[39] His dissenting voice in the celebrated case of Awolowo v Shagari (1979), holding that at least two-thirds of 19 states could only be 13 and not 12²/₃, remains a subject of scholarly discussion.[40]

When the National Judicial Council (NJC) sanctions erring judges, it is because the institution values accountability. At its 111th meeting, the Council invoked its disciplinary powers against 256 judicial officers who were queried for various performance-related issues, suspending two judges for one year without pay, and rejecting appeals by eight compulsorily retired judges from Imo State.[41] The Council also suspended Justice Ibrahim D. Shekarau of the High Court of Nasarawa State for one year without pay for granting an ex parte order directing the transfer of ₦7 million from a petitioner’s bank account to a third party, in breach of Rules 3.1, 3.3, and 3.5 of the Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers.[42] Similarly, Justice Edward A.E. Okpe of the FCT High Court was suspended for one year without pay over allegations of breach of fair hearing in a matrimonial case.[43]

When the Chief Justice of Nigeria reorganises the Supreme Court, merging fragmented units into a single Court Records Processing Unit and creating a Central Information Unit for real-time case information, it is because efficiency and transparency are values worth pursuing.[44] The CJN has consistently emphasised that the preservation of judicial integrity cannot be outsourced or delegated under our constitutional structure, which recognises the separation of powers.[45]

Stakeholders at the 22nd Chief Gani Fawehinmi Annual Lecture emphasised that meaningful reform must begin with value reorientation, starting from law students, universities, and the Nigerian Law School, with stronger emphasis on ethics in legal education and the promotion of role models known for honesty and professional discipline. Pastor Tunde Bakare has also recommended closer collaboration between the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), and the NJC to conduct annual, data-driven audits of the justice sector, while also calling for true judicial autonomy through direct funding from the Consolidated Revenue Fund to safeguard independence and accountability.

5. LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK

The legal framework governing judicial ethics and accountability in Nigeria includes the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, the National Judicial Council Act, the Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers (2016), various High Court rules, and judicial codes of conduct. The National Judicial Council (NJC) is the primary disciplinary body for judicial officers, with constitutional powers to recommend the appointment, promotion, and discipline of judges.[46]

The Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers (2016) establishes core ethical principles that guide judicial conduct. Rule 1 underscores the supreme importance of propriety and the appearance of propriety as essential elements of a judge’s life.[47] Judicial officers are enjoined not only to avoid impropriety but also the appearance of impropriety in all endeavours, both in professional and private life.[48] The measure of propriety is not the legality of the judicial officer’s conduct; what matters most is not what a judge does, but what others think he has done or might do.[49] As the Code states, “proper conduct that appears improper is in fact improper conduct.”[50]

The Revised Code further requires judges to disqualify themselves in proceedings where their impartiality may reasonably be questioned, including cases involving personal bias, financial interest, or relationships with parties or legal practitioners.[51] Judges must also regulate their extra-judicial activities to minimise conflicts with judicial duties. They may participate in civic and charitable activities that do not reflect adversely upon their impartiality, but shall not take any chieftaincy title while in office.[52]

The National Judicial Policy, adopted by the NJC, recognises that “the greatest and most damaging challenge to administration of justice is corruption” and that tackling this challenge “must go beyond mere exhortation and sentiments.”[53] The Policy provides for multifaceted strategies and guidelines to ensure transparency in the administration of justice, including preventive mechanisms and early detection of corrupt practices.[54] Specific transparency mechanisms include case assignment guided by predetermined in-house rules, constant tracking of case duration, and public complaints and information desks in every court.[55]

Between 2016 and 2023, the NJC received hundreds of petitions and sanctioned several judges. At its 111th meeting in May 2026, the Council invoked its disciplinary powers against 256 judicial officers who were queried for various performance-related issues, while recommending the appointment of 12 new Justices of the Court of Appeal.[56] The Council suspended Justice Ibrahim D. Shekarau of the High Court of Nasarawa State for one year without pay for granting an exparte order directing the transfer of ₦7 million from a petitioner’s bank account to a third party, in breach of Rules 3.1, 3.3, and 3.5 of the Revised Code.[57] The Council similarly suspended Justice Edward A.E. Okpe of the FCT High Court for one year without pay over allegations of breach of fair hearing in a matrimonial case.[58]

The NJC also rejected appeals by eight compulsorily retired judges from Imo State who had altered their dates of birth in official records to unlawfully extend their years in service.[59] The Council reiterated its call on the Imo State Judicial Service Commission to expedite the process for appointing a substantive Chief Judge to ensure stability, safeguard judicial independence, and enhance the effective administration of justice.[60]

However, calls persist for greater transparency in the appointment process and the introduction of more lay members in judicial bodies. There are also ongoing debates about the jurisdiction of other bodies like the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) to investigate serving judges. Some legal practitioners argue that the NJC remains the only constitutionally recognised body with authority to discipline or sanction a sitting judge, and that any attempt by another body to directly investigate or discipline a serving judge outside that framework may amount to an overreach.[61] The principle from the case of FRN v. Justice Nganjiwa[62] reinforces the view that judicial officers enjoy a procedural shield requiring prior recourse to the NJC before criminal or quasi-disciplinary action can be taken in matters connected to judicial office.

6. COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE

Across the world, courts are grappling with unprecedented pressures: the technological transformation of litigation, case backlogs, access to justice, rising public distrust, and the cross-border nature of commerce and crime. Nigeria is no exception. Examining how other jurisdictions approach judicial appointments, accountability, and transparency provides useful benchmarks for reform.

• South Africa: The Judicial Service Commission Model

South Africa’s Judicial Service Commission (JSC), established under the Judicial Service Commission Act 1994, provides one of the most transparent models for judicial appointments on the continent.[63] The Commission includes a broad range of members: the Chief Justice as chairperson, the President of the Supreme Court of Appeal, one Judge President, the Minister of Justice, several legal practitioners, and lay members appointed by the President after consultation with political parties.[64]

The JSC conducts public interviews for judicial appointments, a practice that has been widely commended for enhancing transparency and public confidence. The Commission’s procedures, which must be published in the Government Gazette, ensure that the appointment process is open to public scrutiny.[65] South Africa’s approach has been cited as a model for Nigeria, where calls for public interviews and lay participation in judicial appointments have grown louder.[66]

The South African system also provides robust mechanisms for handling complaints against judges. The Judicial Service Commission Act establishes a clear procedure where complaints are referred to the relevant Head of Court, who may dismiss frivolous complaints or refer serious matters to the Chairperson.[67] The Act creates a Committee to consider whether complaints warrant investigation by a Tribunal, ensuring that serious allegations of incapacity, gross incompetence, or gross misconduct are properly examined.[68] Significantly, the preamble to the Act expressly recognises the need to balance judicial independence with “the overriding principles of openness, transparency and accountability that permeate the Constitution and that are equally applicable to judicial institutions and officers.”[69]

• United Kingdom: The Judicial Appointments Commission

The United Kingdom’s Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) was established under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, a landmark reform that enshrined judicial independence in law and radically changed how judges are appointed. The JAC selects candidates solely on merit, requires candidates to be of “good character,” and has statutory regard to the need to encourage diversity in the range of persons available for judicial selection.

The JAC’s processes are rigorous and transparent. Candidates for judicial office undergo multiple stages of assessment, including written examinations, interviews, and role-play exercises. Former Vice President Osinbajo has noted that applicants to judicial office in the UK go through as many as seventeen screening processes, with comprehensive background investigations covering professional credentials, public records, judicial pronouncements, and personal financial affairs.[70]

• United States: The Federal Judicial Nomination Process

The United States federal judicial appointment process involves nomination by the President and confirmation by the Senate. The White House Counsel’s Office typically takes primary responsibility for identifying candidates, working with the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Policy.[71] For district court judges, home-state Senators exercise significant influence through the “blue-slip” process, while circuit court appointments afford the President greater authority.[72]

The confirmation process involves public hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, where nominees face rigorous questioning about their qualifications, judicial philosophy, and personal background. This public scrutiny has been described as a “rigorous public screening” that sifts through “the entire public, and sometimes private lives of candidates.”[73]

• Lessons for Nigeria

Nigeria’s recent reforms, including the NJC’s 2024 policy to publish names of judicial candidates and invite public input, align with international best practices.[74] Justice Kekere-Ekun has stated that the policy “introduce[s] an additional layer of transparency into the process of appointing judges by ensuring that members of the public and other relevant stakeholders can raise objections, provide information, or endorse nominees before appointments are finalized.”[75]

However, challenges remain. Nigeria’s current process is vulnerable to political influence, with the Chief Justice of Nigeria wielding “overwhelming control at the federal level while governors dominate at the state level – arrangements that fuel nepotism and weaken meritocracy. There are several calls for constitutional restructuring of the NJC, the Federal Judicial Service Commission, and state Judicial Service Commissions, with laypersons heading these bodies.[76]

The United Kingdom’s experience provides a cautionary tale: even rigorous processes can face legal challenges, as demonstrated by cases like R(Thomas) v Judicial Appointments Commission[77] and Ghosh v Judicial Appointments Commission[78], which involved allegations of race discrimination.⁸³ These cases underscore the importance of continually reviewing and refining judicial appointment processes to ensure fairness and integrity.

7. CHALLENGES FACING THE JUDICIARY

Despite the achievements and institutional strengths identified above, the Nigerian judiciary faces significant challenges that require urgent attention. These challenges, if left unaddressed, threaten not only the integrity of the judiciary but also the stability of Nigeria’s democracy. Justice Mohammed Baba Idris of the Supreme Court recently identified seven major challenges confronting justice delivery in Nigeria: delays in adjudication, inadequate funding and infrastructure, corruption concerns, political interference, technological deficiencies, insecurity, and the growing disregard for court orders.[79]

• Delays in Adjudication

Prolonged delays in the determination of cases have become one of the most troubling features of the justice system. Justice Idris lamented that “it is not uncommon for litigants who initiated proceedings to pass away before the final determination of their cases.”[80] Justice Habeeb Abiru of the Supreme Court has expressed concern that an average case takes up to 14 years to determine, a situation that “erodes the value of justice and deepens public suspicion.”[81]

The delays are attributable to multiple factors. Lawyers have identified frequent adjournments, case backlogs, inadequate judges, missing case files, high filing and service fees, and unnecessary arrests by security agencies as contributing causes.[82] Simon Agwu, a legal practitioner, noted that “the system manpower is not enough, we don’t have enough judges such that you see a judge presiding over a large number of cases on the court’s docket in a day.”[83]

The Senate has recently taken legislative action to address this challenge. In June 2026, lawmakers advanced two bills seeking to increase the number of judges of the Federal High Court and justices of the Court of Appeal. The proposal would increase the number of justices of the Court of Appeal from 70 to 110 and introduce provisions for virtual court proceedings.[84]

• Inadequate Funding and Infrastructure

Justice Idris raised concerns over poor funding and the slow implementation of constitutional provisions guaranteeing financial autonomy for the judiciary. He noted that “many courts across the country still operate under difficult conditions, lacking modern technological facilities, digital infrastructure, research tools and adequate support systems.”[85]

The Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, has acknowledged recent improvements in the welfare of judicial officers but observed that such gains had not translated into significant improvements in court infrastructure and operations, particularly at the state level. She stated that “challenges persist, especially at the state levels where judiciaries grapple with budget deficits and reduced allocations that severely impair infrastructure, daily operations and access to justice.”[86]

A lawyer has called for the full financial independence of the judiciary, arguing that “if judges’ welfare is considered a priority, funding should be channelled directly to the judiciary instead of allowing the executive to determine how such benefits are provided.”[87] He lamented that “the judiciary has no money to even sustain its basic welfare” and “no money to even acquire modern facilities that they need to run their work and their adjudicatory activities well.”[88]

• Corruption and Ethical Concerns

Corruption remains one of the most damaging challenges facing the Nigerian judiciary. The NBA President, Afam Osigwe, raised a fresh alarm in February 2026, stating that “corruption in the third arm of government is a threat to democracy, social justice and public confidence in the rule of law.”[89] Osigwe warned that “many Nigerians had steadily lost faith in the judiciary due mainly to the growing perception that justice could be delayed, manipulated or purchased outright by the highest bidder.”[90]

Osigwe cited findings from recent surveys by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), which estimated that Nigerian public officials received about N721 billion in cash bribes in 2023, with judges ranking among top recipients.[91] Referring to the 2018-2020 survey by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), he noted that lawyers accounted for the highest proportion of bribe-givers in the estimated N9.4 billion paid as bribes within the justice sector.[92] He also quoted a Chatham House report indicating that 61 per cent of Nigerians believe judges are likely to accept bribes to influence their rulings, attributing the perception to political interference, nepotism and lack of transparency in judicial appointments.[93]

Justice Idris, while acknowledging that most judicial officers remain persons of integrity, warned that “allegations and perceptions of corruption continue to undermine public trust in the justice system.”[94]

Senior Advocate of Nigeria Dr Charles Mekwunye has warned that judicial compromise remains one of the greatest threats to Nigeria’s democracy, insisting that “judicial officers who deliberately pervert justice in election-related matters must be held accountable” and that “the era of impunity must end.”[95]

• Political Interference

Political interference in judicial processes remains a persistent challenge. There are concerns about judges being appointed based on political connections rather than merit. Osinbajo has argued that Nigeria’s current process is vulnerable to political influence, with the Chief Justice of Nigeria wielding “overwhelming control at the federal level while governors dominate at the state level – arrangements that fuel nepotism and weaken meritocracy.”[96]

Justice Idris warned that “any attempt by political actors to intimidate courts, influence judicial outcomes or disregard lawful court orders poses a serious threat to constitutional governance and the rule of law,” adding that “a democracy cannot flourish where judgments of competent courts are ignored with impunity.”[97]

A recent incident in Rivers State has raised serious concerns about judicial independence. The Society for Rule of Law in Nigeria (SRLN) reported that the police orderly to a judge who delivered judgment against the Nigeria Police Force was withdrawn shortly after the ruling. The SRLN described the action as “an act of retaliation and intimidation” that is “not only unconstitutional but strikes at the very heart of Nigeria’s democracy.”[98] The case involved a judge who had discharged and acquitted twelve defendants who had been arbitrarily arrested and charged with murder. The court found that police witnesses had contradicted themselves, fabricated statements, and manufactured evidence. Shortly after this judgment, the police reportedly withdrew the judge’s orderly.[99]

• Technological Deficiencies

Many courts continue to operate with outdated systems. Justice Idris noted that many courts lack “modern technological facilities, digital infrastructure, research tools and adequate support systems.”[100] However, the CJN has highlighted the recent implementation of the Nigerian Case Management System (NCMS) at the Supreme Court, alongside the Supreme Court Practice Directions 2026, which require the electronic upload of court processes and records.[101] Osinbajo has urged the judiciary to leverage modern electronic research tools to minimise unnecessary delays and inconsistencies, noting that such tools already provide clear authorities on legal issues.[102]

• Growing Disregard for Court Orders

Justice Idris identified “the growing disregard for court orders” as a major challenge confronting the Nigerian judiciary.[103] This trend undermines the authority of courts and the rule of law. The CJN has also been concerned that public trust is not helped by perceptions of corruption and delays in the judicial process, particularly when politicians openly disregard judicial decisions or make statements that cast doubt on the impartiality of judges.

8. CASE LAW ILLUSTRATIONS

The following cases illustrate both the achievements and challenges of Nigerian jurisprudence, demonstrating the judiciary’s role in upholding the rule of law, protecting rights, and sometimes generating controversy through its decisions.

• Buhari v INEC(2008) — Electoral Law and Substantial Compliance

The Supreme Court’s decision in Buhari v INEC[104] stands as one of the most significant and controversial electoral judgments in Nigeria’s history. The case arose from the 2007 presidential election, in which General Muhammadu Buhari of the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) challenged the declaration of Umaru Yar’Adua of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as winner.

The central issue was whether the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) failure to serialise and bind ballot papers in booklets as mandated by Section 45(2) of the Electoral Act 2006 constituted substantial non-compliance that should invalidate the election. The Supreme Court upheld the election by a split verdict of 4-3, holding that the non-serialisation did not substantially affect the result of the election.

The dissenting judgment of Justice George Oguntade (as he then was) has been widely praised for its clarity. He held that “the ballot paper is the live wire, the heartbeat and the engine room of any election. Without ballot papers being serialised and bound in booklets, as required by Section 45(2), it becomes possible to print fake ballot papers which can then be introduced into the ballot boxes fraudulently.” This case illustrates the judiciary’s critical role in interpreting electoral laws and the ongoing tension between technical compliance and substantial justice. The decision remains instructive for students of Nigerian law and demonstrates the intellectual depth of the Supreme Court during this period.

• Amaechi v INEC(2008) — Candidate Nomination and Political Party Primacy

In Amaechi v INEC[105], the Supreme Court addressed the issue of candidate nomination and the centrality of political parties in Nigeria’s electoral system. Rotimi Amaechi had won the PDP governorship primary in Rivers State, but INEC recognised the candidacy of Celestine Omehia instead. The Court ultimately declared Amaechi the winner of the election, even though he had not participated in the general election.

In his lead judgment, Justice Oguntade emphasised that “the primary method of contest for elective offices is therefore between the parties. If, as provided in section 221 above, it is only a party that canvasses for votes… at the end of the day, it is the party that wins or loses an election.” The Court reasoned that the candidate was merely the vehicle through which the political party contested, and since the PDP won the election, it was the party that won but not the individual candidate.

This decision has been subject to scholarly critique. Some scholars have questioned whether it is acceptable for a court to “declare Amaechi the winner of an election he did not participate in,” noting that “this decision remains problematic for, while it is logical to resolve the nomination issue in Amaechi’s favour on the basis of conditions that persisted prior to the election, declaring him winner of a general interparty election in which he had not participated is quite another matter.”

• Fawehinmi v IGP(2000) — Freedom of Speech and Human Rights

Fawehinmi v IGP[106] remains a landmark on freedom of speech and the right to peaceful protest. Chief Gani Fawehinmi, the renowned human rights lawyer, successfully challenged the police’s refusal to allow a public protest, establishing that citizens have a constitutional right to assemble and express grievances without prior police permission in circumstances where such assembly is peaceful and lawful. The case exemplifies the judiciary’s role as the defender of fundamental rights, particularly in the early years of Nigeria’s return to civilian rule.

• Ogugu v State(1994) — Death Penalty Jurisprudence

The case of Ogugu v State[107] is a significant authority on death penalty jurisprudence in Nigeria. The Supreme Court examined the procedural requirements for imposing the death sentence and the standard of proof required in capital cases. This case, decided during the military era, demonstrates the judiciary’s continued engagement with substantive criminal law even under difficult circumstances.

• Medical and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal v Okonkwo(2001) — Right to Autonomy and Informed Consent

Medical and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal v Okonkwo[108]  is a seminal case on the right to bodily autonomy and informed consent in medical treatment. Dr. Okonkwo, a medical practitioner, had treated a patient who was a Jehovah’s Witness and had refused blood transfusion on religious grounds. The patient died, and the Medical and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal charged Okonkwo with professional misconduct and negligence.

The Supreme Court held that a competent adult patient has the constitutional right to refuse life-saving treatment on religious grounds. Justice Uwais, in the lead judgment, stated:

The right to privacy implies a right to protect one’s thought, conscience or religious belief and practice from coercive and unjustified intrusion; and, one’s body from unauthorised invasion. The right to freedom of thought, conscience or religion implies a right not to be prevented, without lawful justification, from choosing the course of one’s life, fashioned on what one believes in, and a right not to be coerced into acting contrary to religious belief.

The Court further held that if a competent adult patient exercising their right to reject life-saving treatment on religious grounds “chooses a path that may ultimately lead to his death, in the absence of judicial intervention overriding the patient’s decision,” the practitioner is left with no meaningful option but to respect that decision. This case demonstrates the judiciary’s commitment to protecting fundamental rights, including the right to refuse medical treatment, and its engagement with complex ethical dilemmas.

• Saraki v FRN(2016) — Due Process and Criminal Procedure

Saraki v FRN[109] involved the trial of Dr. Bukola Saraki, the then Senate President, at the Code of Conduct Tribunal on charges of false declaration of assets. The Supreme Court’s decision granting a stay of proceedings in the case generated considerable controversy and raised important questions about the interpretation of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015.

Femi Falana (SAN), in a widely-circulated commentary, criticised the Supreme Court’s decision, arguing that the Court had “ignored the provisions of sections 306 and 396 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015,” which abolished stay of proceedings in criminal trials. He noted that the ACJA had been enacted to address the problem of criminal trials being “stalled for 12 years on account of preliminary objections raised and argued from the high court to the apex court,” as had occurred in Mohammed Abacha v FRN[110].

Justice Muhammad, in a concurring judgment in Saraki, emphasised the principle of statutory interpretation: “In interpreting provisions of the constitution and indeed any statute, the settled principle is that where the words used are devoid of ambiguity, same must be given natural meaning.” Justice Kekere-Ekun (as she then was) similarly held that “in such situation contrary meaning should not be inserted” and that “the object of statutory interpretation is to discover the intention of the lawmaker which is to be deduced from the language used.”

This case illustrates the ongoing challenges in Nigeria’s criminal justice system and the tension between procedural rights and the need for expeditious trial in corruption cases.

9. RECOMMENDATIONS

Drawing from the analysis of challenges facing the judiciary and the institutional framework already in place, the following recommendations are proposed. These recommendations are designed to build on existing strengths, address identified gaps, and consolidate the gains achieved through recent reforms. The focus is on practical, actionable measures that can restore public confidence and strengthen judicial integrity.

• Strengthen Ethics Education and Value Re-orientation

Ethics must be emphasised at all levels of legal education. The National Judicial Institute should continue to integrate ethics training into all judicial orientation and continuing education programmes. The NJC’s recent commendation of nine judges for exemplary performance during the 2024 and 2025 legal years, alongside the issuance of 256 letters to judicial officers over performance-related issues, sets a clear standard that performance matters. The commendation of magistrates like Chief Magistrate Onome Martha Nwankwo as “Best Magistrate in Nigeria” demonstrates that integrity and diligence are recognised and celebrated. Institutions like HEDA Resource Centre, through the Gani Fawehinmi Impact and Integrity Awards, also play a vital role in promoting integrity. The success of judicial reforms ultimately depends on a sustained partnership between the Bench and the Bar.

• Enhance Judicial Accountability Mechanisms

The NJC has demonstrated its commitment to accountability through its disciplinary actions. At its 111th meeting, the Council suspended two judges for one year without pay. The suspension of Justice Ibrahim D. Shekarau of the High Court of Nasarawa State was over judicial misconduct involving the grant of an ex parte order in breach of the Revised Code of Conduct. Justice Edward A. E. Okpe of the FCT High Court was similarly suspended over breach of fair hearing in a matrimonial case. The NJC also rejected appeals by eight judges compulsorily retired for age falsification. These actions show that the system is working. The Independent Judicial Accountability Panel has also called for further reforms to reduce concentration of power in the office of the Chief Justice of Nigeria.

• Improve Judicial Welfare and Working Conditions

President Bola Tinubu has described the welfare of judicial officers as “a strategic investment in the rule of law.” The commissioning of the 10th Court of Appeal Judges’ Quarters in Katampe and the flag-off of 20 units of FCT High Court Judges’ Quarters demonstrate federal commitment to improving judicial welfare. The President argued that “judicial independence cannot thrive without adequate welfare and security for judicial officers.” He also called on state governments to invest in judicial infrastructure and welfare. The Chief Justice of Nigeria has further called for stronger management of judicial financial resources, emphasising that “effective administration of judicial resources was as critical as securing adequate funding.”

• Accelerate Technological Innovation

The implementation of the Nigerian Case Management System (NCMS) and the Supreme Court Practice Directions 2026, which mandate electronic filing of court processes and records, represents a significant step toward modernisation. The Chief Justice of Nigeria has assured the Bar of the Court’s commitment to continuously improving the electronic filing platform. The NBA President has pledged the Bar’s support for the successful rollout, while the Chief Registrar has disclosed that user manuals and training materials have been prepared to guide practitioners. The digitisation of court processes will reduce delays, enhance transparency, and improve access to justice. The CJN has also noted that courts across the Global South have modernised operations despite limited resources by adopting digital innovations such as electronic filing systems, digital case registries and automated case management tools.

• Address Lower Court Challenges

While reforms at the Supreme Court are commendable, the bulk of justice delivery occurs at lower courts. The NJC’s recommendation of 12 new Justices of the Court of Appeal and appointments of judges across various state high courts is a positive step. The Council has also extended the appointment of the Acting Chief Judge of Imo State to allow completion of the process for appointing a substantive chief judge. However, much more is needed. The President of the Court of Appeal has urged sustained investment in modern facilities and technology, saying: “Building a judiciary fit for the next 50 years requires continued commitment to judicial welfare.” This sentiment applies equally to all levels of the judiciary.

• Reform Judicial Appointment Processes

The NJC has adopted a new policy requiring retired public servants seeking judicial appointments to have a minimum of ten years remaining in service before attaining the mandatory judicial retirement age. This clarifies previous ambiguities. However, the Independent Judicial Accountability Panel has called for unbundling the office of the Chief Justice of Nigeria to reduce concentration of powers. Calls continue for greater transparency in the appointment process, including lay participation and public interviews.

• Recognise and Reward Excellence

The NJC’s commendation of nine judges for exemplary performance sends a powerful signal. The recognition of Chief Magistrate Onome Martha Nwankwo as the Best Magistrate in Nigeria demonstrates that integrity and excellence are valued. Such recognitions should be institutionalised and expanded. The Gani Fawehinmi Impact and Integrity Awards similarly celebrate Nigerians who uphold transparency. These initiatives should be encouraged and expanded to create a culture where integrity is celebrated and emulated.

• Ensure Adequate Funding and Financial Autonomy

The Chief Justice of Nigeria has called for stronger management of judicial financial resources, linking efficient resource management to broader judicial reforms. President Tinubu has noted significant increases in funding for the judicial sector under his administration. However, challenges persist, especially at state levels where judiciaries grapple with budget deficits and reduced allocations. The Federal Government’s intervention in judicial infrastructure is commendable, but states must also fulfill their constitutional obligations. The FCT Minister has urged governors to take greater responsibility for federal judicial institutions located within their states, arguing that such courts primarily serve citizens of host states.

• Shorten Election Petition Timelines

The Independent Judicial Accountability Panel has called for a two-level system of election litigation for National Assembly and governorship elections, with appeals terminating at the Court of Appeal except in exceptional circumstances. This would reduce the burden on the Supreme Court and expedite the resolution of election disputes, which often linger for years and undermine public confidence.

10. CONCLUSION: A CALL TO BUILD, NOT BREAK

The judiciary is not perfect, but it is indispensable. Criticism must be with respect, and reform must be with appreciation. As Justice Osinbajo reminded us, the Supreme Court is final, not because it is always right, but because there must be an end to litigation. Public acceptance of judicial decisions is as critical as their constitutional validity. Nigeria’s democracy depends on a judiciary that is both authoritative and trusted. Finality must go hand in hand with fairness.

The Nigerian judiciary has a proud legacy. From the courageous justices of the “golden era” who stood against military dictatorship to the modern-day judges who deliver justice under difficult conditions, the Bench has demonstrated time and again that it is capable of rising to the occasion. The Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, has shown that reform is possible when leadership is committed to integrity, transparency, and institutional renewal. Her interventions in Imo and Benue States, the reorganisation of the Supreme Court, and the NJC’s increased disciplinary actions all point to a judiciary that is serious about reform.

Yet much work remains. Delays in adjudication, inadequate funding, allegations of corruption, political interference, technological deficiencies, and the growing disregard for court orders all threaten the integrity of the justice system. These challenges cannot be ignored, but they must also not be allowed to define the entire narrative. The judiciary is not the enemy of the people; it is their mirror. When the judiciary is weak, democracy suffers. When it is strong, democracy flourishes.

The recommendations in this paper aims to strengthen ethics education, enhancing accountability mechanisms, improving welfare and working conditions, accelerating technological innovation, addressing lower court challenges, reforming appointment processes, recognising excellence, ensuring adequate funding, and shortening election petition timelines are all designed to build on what already works while addressing what does not.

The Bench is not our enemy. It is our mirror. When we strengthen the bench, we strengthen democracy. Let us celebrate the courage of our judges, address the gaps with facts, and work together for a judiciary that Nigerians can be proud of. The journey of reform is long, but the destination which is a judiciary that is independent, trusted, respected, and value-driven is worth every effort.

REFERENCES

Case Law

1. Abacha v Fawehinmi (2000) 6 NWLR (Pt 660) 228.
2. AG Bendel State v AG Federation (1981) LPELR-605(SC).
3. AG Federation v AG Abia State (2002) (citation details to be confirmed).
4. AG of Ogun State v AG Federation (1982) LPELR-11(SC).
5. Amaechi v INEC (2007) LPELR-449(SC); (2008) 5 NWLR (Pt 1080) 227 .
6. Awolowo v Shagari (1979) (citation details to be confirmed).
7. Buhari v INEC (2008) 19 NWLR (Pt 1120) 419; LPELR-814(SC) .
8. Fawehinmi v IGP (2000) 7 NWLR (Pt 665) 481; (2002) LPELR-1258(SC) .
9. Federal Civil Service Commission v Laoye (1989) 2 NWLR (Pt 1106) 652 .
10. FRN v Justice Nganjiwa (2022) LPELR-58066(SC).
11. Garba v University of Maiduguri (1986) 1 NWLR (Pt 18) 550 .
12. INEC v PDP (2015) LPELR-25669(CA).
13. Medical and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal v Okonkwo (2002) AHRLR 159 (NgSC 2001); [2001] WRN 1.
14. Military Government of Lagos State v Ojukwu (1986) LPELR-3186(SC); (1986) 1 NWLR (Pt 18) .
15. Ogugu v State (1994) 9 NWLR (Pt 366) 27-28.
16. Saraki v FRN (2016) LPELR-40013(SC).

Books and Book Chapters

1. Eso, K Law and Justice in a Developing Society (1987).
2. Gasiokwu, MOU Human Rights: History, Ideology and Law (Mono Expression LTD 2001).
3. Oputa, C Human Rights in the Political, Social and Economic Spheres (1999).

Legislation and Official Documents

1. Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999.
2. Judicial Service Commission Act 9 of 1994 (South Africa).
3. National Judicial Policy, National Judicial Council, January 2026.
4. Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2016.

Newspaper Articles and Online Sources

1. Aigbokhan, P and Ekereokosu, F ‘Kekere-Ekun, CJN and a New Era for NJI’ The Guardian (22 August 2025).
2. Attavit, K ‘CJN Calls for Prudent Use of Financial Resources Allocated to Nigerian Judiciary’ Independent (20 July 2026).
3. Bakare, T Keynote Address at the 22nd Chief Gani Fawehinmi Annual Lecture, Nigerian Bar Association, Ikeja Branch (January 2026).
4. Daniya, O ‘Judicial Impunity Threatens Democracy, SAN Warns’ Punch (1 June 2026).
5. Ejike, S ‘CJN Urges Strong Financial Oversight, Digital Innovation to Strengthen Nigeria’s Judiciary’ Tribune Online (20 July 2026).
6. Ejike, S ‘Judges’ Appointment More Transparent Now — CJN Kekere-Ekun’ Tribune Online (2 October 2025).
7. Folorunsho-Francis, A ‘Senate Backs Adding More Judges to Clear Case Backlog’ Punch (10 June 2026).
8. Fragoso, M ‘The Judicial Appointment Process’ Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy (2024) 4.
9. Igbintade, W ‘NJC Warns Judges Against Reckless Ex Parte Orders, Cautions Heads of Court on Case Assignments’ Thisday (16 January 2026).
10. Iwuchukwu, F ‘Justice Tsoho: Lawyers Question CCB’s Power to Probe Serving Judges’ Tribune Online (19 March 2026).
11. Jimoh, M ‘Tinubu to Judges: The Bench Must Never Be a Sanctuary for Compromise’ News Agency of Nigeria (17 November 2025).
12. Joseph, T ‘Corruption Among Lawyers, Judges Holds Nation Captive, Says Bakare’ Independent (16 January 2026).
13. Kekere-Ekun, K Remarks at the Opening Session of the 2026 Annual Conference of the Nigerian Bar Association Section on Legal Practice, Lagos (April 2026).
14. Leadership ‘CJN, Osinbajo Urge Lawyers To Prioritise Ethics, Justice Over Monetary Gains’ (9 April 2026).
15. National Judicial Institute ‘Preservation of Judicial Integrity Cannot Be Delegated, Says CJN Kekere-Ekun’ (27 April 2026).
16. New Telegraph ‘Lawyers Demand More Judges, Courts to Reduce Delays in Justice Delivery’ (12 August 2026).
17. News Agency of Nigeria ‘Lawyers Say Judicial Reforms Uneven Across Nigeria Amid Progress’ Premium Times (30 April 2026).
18. Njoku, P ‘Your Actions, Expressions Are Under Public Scrutiny, CJN Warns Judges’ Independent (13 April 2026).
19. Nwokoro, S ‘Osinbajo, Others Canvass Reforms to Restore Confidence in Judiciary’ The Guardian (16 December 2025).
20. Ochojila, A ‘Nigeria’s Democracy at Risk Without Judicial Reforms, Says Supreme Court Justice’ The Guardian (2 June 2026).
21. Ochojila, A ‘Public Trust in Courts Hinges on Your Integrity, CJN Tells Judges’ The Guardian (13 April 2026).
22. Ogunye, J ‘Golden Era of Judiciary Is Gone — Ogunye’ Punch (28 February 2019).
23. Okonkwo, N ‘Ejiofor Urges Action to Rebuild Trust in Nigeria’s Judiciary’ Vanguard (24 March 2026).
24. Osinbajo, Y Remarks at the Opening Session of the 2026 Annual Conference of the Nigerian Bar Association Section on Legal Practice, Lagos (April 2026).
25. Oyenisa, T ‘Reforming the Bench: Lawyers Demand Sweeping Reforms in Judges’ Appointment’ New Telegraph (30 March 2026).
26. Premium Times ‘An Agenda for the New Chief Justice of Nigeria, by Odinkalu, Ojukwu, Erugo & Obono’ (25 August 2024).
27. The Sun ‘Garlands for Anambra Magistrate’ (18 November 2025).
28. The Sun ‘NJC Moves Against 256 Judicial Officers, Suspends Two Judges Over Misconduct’ (16 May 2026).
29. The Sun ‘Osigwe’s Alarm on Corruption in the Judiciary’ (17 February 2026).
30. Thisday ‘Bakare Calls for Sweeping Reforms in Nigeria’s Justice Sector’ (20 January 2026).
31. Thisday ‘NJC Appoints 35 Judges, Elevates Oyewole’ (20 January 2026).
32. Tinubu, B Message at the 2025 All Nigerian Judges’ Conference, National Judicial Institute, Abuja (November 2025).
33. Tribune Online ‘Group Chides Withdrawal of Orderly of Rivers Judge Who Gave Judgment Against Police’ (7 November 2025).
34. Uhurebor, E ‘Nigeria’s Judiciary Must Be Financially Independent from Executive — Mato’ New Telegraph (8 July 2026).
35. Vanguard ‘Justice Eso, Deacon of Integrity Takes a Bow’ (17 November 2012).

Conference Papers and Institutional Materials

1. National Judicial Institute ‘Orientation Course for Newly Appointed Magistrates: Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers’ (2017).

[1] Pastor Tunde Bakare, Keynote Address at the 22nd Chief Gani Fawehinmi Annual Lecture (Nigerian Bar Association, Ikeja Branch, January 2026).

[2] Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, Remarks at the Opening Session of the 2026 Annual Conference of the Nigerian Bar Association Section on Legal Practice (Lagos, April 2026) cited in CJN, Osinbajo Urge Lawyers To Prioritise Ethics, Justice Over Monetary Gains, Leadership, 9 April 2026.

[3] ibid.

[4] Prof Yemi Osinbajo (SAN), Remarks at the Opening Session of the 2026 Annual Conference of the Nigerian Bar Association Section on Legal Practice (Lagos, April 2026) cited in CJN, Osinbajo Urge Lawyers To Prioritise Ethics, Justice Over Monetary Gains, Leadership, 9 April 2026.

[5] News Agency of Nigeria, ‘Lawyers Say Judicial Reforms Uneven Across Nigeria amid Progress’ Premiumtimes Online News of 30 April 2026 accessed from < https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/top-news/876038-lawyers-say-judicial-reforms-uneven-across-nigeria-amid-progress.html> on 13 August 2026 at 1:49PM.

[6] Titilope Joseph, ‘Corruption Among Lawyers, Judges holds Nation Captive, Says Bakare’ Independent Online News of 16 January 2026 accessed from < https://independent.ng/corruption-among-lawyers-judges-holds-nation-captive-says-bakare/> on 13 August 2026 at 2:11PM.

[7] Thisday, ‘Bakare Calls for Sweeping Reforms in Nigeria’s Justice Sector’ Thisday Online News accessed from < https://www.thisdaylive.com/2026/01/20/bakare-calls-for-sweeping-reforms-in-nigerias-justice-sector/> on 13 August 2026 at 2:24PM.

[8] Premium Times, ‘An Agenda for the New Chief Justice of Nigeria, by Odinkalu, Ojukwu, Erugo & Obono’ Premium Times Online News of 25 August 2024 accessed from < https://www.premiumtimesng.com/opinion/727923-an-agenda-for-the-new-chief-justice-of-nigeria-by-odinkalu-ojukwu-erugo-obono.html?tztc=1> on 13 August 2026 at2 :38PM

[9] Nwabueze Okonkwo, ‘Ejiofor urges action to rebuild trust in Nigeria’s judiciary’, Vanguard Online News of 24 March 2026 accessed from < https://www.vanguardngr.com/2026/03/ejiofor-urges-action-to-rebuild-trust-in-nigerias-judiciary/> on 13 August 2026 at 3:09PM.

[10] Paschal Njoku, ‘Your Actions, Expressions are under Public Scrutiny, CJN warns Judges’ Independent Online News of 13 April 2026 accessed from < https://independent.ng/your-actions-expressions-are-under-public-scrutiny-cjn-warns-judges/> on 14 August 2026 at 3:58PM.

[11] ibid.

[12] Thisday, ‘NJC Appoints 35 Judges, Elevates Oyewole’ Thisday Online News accessed from < https://www.thisdaylive.com/2026/01/20/njc-appoints-35-judges-elevates-oyewole/> on 14 August 2026 at 4:12PM.

[13] Ameh Ochojila, ‘Public Trust in Courts hinges on your Integrity, CJN Tells Judges’ The Guardian Online News of 13 April 2026 accessed from < https://guardian.ng/features/law/public-trust-in-courts-hinges-on-your-integrity-cjn-tells-judges/> on 14 August 2026 at 4:22PM.

[14] Jiti Ogunye, ‘Golden era of Judiciary is Gone – Ogunye’ Punch Online News of 28 February 2019 accessed from < https://punchng.com/golden-era-of-judiciary-is-gone-ogunye/#google_vignette> on 14 August 2026 at 4:36PM.

[15] Vanguard, ‘Justice Eso, Deacon of Integrity Takes a Bow’ Vanguard Online News of 17 November 2012 accessed from <https://www.vanguardngr.com/2012/11/justice-eso-deacon-of-integrity-takes-a-bow/> on 14 August 2026 at 4:48PM.

[16] President Bola Tinubu, Message at the 2025 All Nigerian Judges’ Conference, National Judicial Institute, Abuja (November 2025) cited in “Justice mustn’t be for sale, Tinubu urges judges,” The Sun Nigeria, 11 May 2026.

[17] Ibid.

[18] (2008) LPELR-814(SC).

[19] (2007) LPELR-449(SC).

[20] Ogunye (n 14).

[21] (1986) LPELR-3186(SC).

[22] ibid.

[23] (1986) 1 NWLR (Pt.18) 550.

[24] (1989) 2 NWLR Pt.1106 P.652.

[25] (2000) 7 NWLR (pt. 665) 481.

[26] (2000) 6 NWLR (PT. 660) 228

[27] Ogunye (n 14).

[28] (2015) LPELR-25669(CA)

[29] (1981) LPELR-605(SC).

[30] (1982) LPELR-11(SC).

[31] Vanguard (n 15).

[32] ibid.

[33] Thisday (n 12).

[34] The Sun, NJC Moves against 256 Judicial Officers, Suspenda Two Judges over Misconduct’ The Sun Online News of 16 May 2026 accessed from < https://thesun.ng/njc-moves-against-256-judicial-officers-suspends-two-judges-over-misconduct/> on 15 August 2026 at 9:05AM.

[35] ibid.

[36] Wale Igbintade, ‘NJC Warns Judges Against Reckless Ex Parte Orders, Cautions Heads of Court on Case Assignments’ Thisday Online News accessed from < https://www.thisdaylive.com/2026/01/16/njc-warns-judges-against-reckless-ex-parte-orders-cautions-heads-of-court-on-case-assignments/#google_vignette> on 15 August 2026 at 9:21AM.

[37] Muhyideen Jimoh, ‘Tinubu to Judges: The Bench Must Never be a Sanctuary for Compromise’ News agency of Nigeria Online News of 17 November 2025 accessed from <https://nannews.ng/tinubu-to-judges-the-bench-must-never-be-a-sanctuary-for-compromise/> on 15 August 2026 at 9:33AM.

[38] ibid.

[39] Vanguard (n 15).

[40] ibid.

[41] The Sun (n 34).

[42] ibid.

[43] ibid.

[44] President Aigbokhan and Francisca Ekereokosu, ‘Kekere – Ekun, CJN and a New Era for NJI’ The Guardian Online News of 22 August 2025 accessed from < https://guardian.ng/opinion/columnists/kekere-ekun-cjn-and-a-new-era-for-nji/> on 15 August 2026 at 9:47AM.

[45] National Judicial Institute, ‘Preservation of Judicial Integrity Cannot be Delegated says CJN Kekere – Ekun’ accessed from < https://nji.gov.ng/news.php?id=144&gg=preservation-of-judicial-integrity-cannot-be-delegated-says-cjn-kekereekun> on 15 August 2026 at 9:54AM.

[46] Section 153 and Third Schedule, Part I, Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999; Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2016.

[47] Rule 1.1, Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2016. See also National Judicial Institute, “Orientation Course for Newly Appointed Magistrates: Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers” (2017), available at <http://nji.gov.ng/images/Workshop_Papers/2017/Orientation_Newly_Appointed_Magistrates/s3.pdf.>

[48] Rule 1.2, Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2016.

[49] National Judicial Institute, “Orientation Course for Newly Appointed Magistrates: Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers” (2017), 8, available at http://nji.gov.ng/images/Workshop_Papers/2017/Orientation_Newly_Appointed_Magistrates/s3.pdf.

[50] ibid.

[51] Rule 12, Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2016.

[52] Rule 13, Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2016.

[53] National Judicial Policy, Section 6.1, National Judicial Council, January 2026, https://njc.gov.ng/index.php/national-judicial-policy.

[54] National Judicial Policy, Sections 6.2-6.3.

[55] National Judicial Policy, Section 6.8.

[56] The Sun (n 34).

[57] ibid.

[58] ibid.

[59] ibid.

[60] ibid.

[61] Francis Iwuchukwu, ‘Justice Tsoho: Lawyers Question CCB’s Power to Probe Serving Judges’ Tribune Online News of 19 March 2026 accessed from <https://tribuneonlineng.com/justice-tsoho-lawyers-question-ccbs-power-to-probe-serving-judges/> on 15 August 2026 at 10:07AM.

[62] (2022) LPELR-58066(SC)

[63] Judicial Service Commission Act 9 of 1994 (South Africa), Preamble.

[64] Judicial Service Commission Act 9 of 1994 (South Africa), Section 2.

[65] Judicial Service Commission Act 9 of 1994 (South Africa), Section 5.

[66] Tunde Oyenisa, ‘Reforming the Bench Lawyers Demand Sweeping Reforms in Judges Apppoinment’ New Telegraph Online News of 30 March 2026 accessed from < https://newtelegraphng.com/reforming-the-bench-lawyers-demand-sweeping-reforms-in-judges-appointment/> on 15 August 2026 at 10:31AM.

[67] Judicial Service Commission Act, 1994 [Consolidated Act],” Section 15

[68] ibid., Sections 16-17.

[69] Judicial Service Commission Act 9 of 1994 (South Africa), Preamble.

[70] Oyenisa (n 66).

[71] Marcos Fragoso, “The Judicial Appointment Process,” Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy (2024), 4, accessed from <https://journals.law.harvard.edu/jlpp/wp-content/uploads/sites/90/2024/07/Fragoso-The-Judicial-Appointment-Process-vf.pdf.> on15 August 2026 at 10:39AM.

[72] ibid 5-6.

[73] Oyenisa (n 66).

[74] Sunday Ejike, ‘Judges Appointment More Transparent Now – CJN Kekere – Ekun’ Tribune Online News of 2 October 2025 accessed from < https://tribuneonlineng.com/judges-appointment-more-transparent-now-cjn-kekere-ekun/> on 15 August 2026 at 10:46AM.

[75] ibid.

[76] Silver Nwokoro, ‘Osinbajo, Others Canvass Reforms to Restore Confidence in Judiciary’ The Guardian Online News of 16 December 2025 accessed from <https://guardian.ng/features/law/osinbajo-others-canvass-reforms-to-restore-confidence-in-judiciary/> on 15 August 2026 at 10:58Am.

[77] [2025] EWCA Civ 912,

[78] ET/2203773/2022

[79] Ameh Ochojila, ‘Nigeria’s Democracy at Risk Without Judicial Reforms, Says Supreme Court Justice’ The Guardian Online News of 3 June 2026 accessed from <https://guardian.ng/news/nigerias-democracy-at-risk-without-judicial-reforms-says-supreme-court-justice/> on 15 August 2026 at 11:08AM.

[80] ibid.

[81] Nwokoro (n 76).

[82] New Telegraph, ‘Lawyers Demand More Judges, Courts to Reduce Delays in Justice Delivery’ New Telegraph Online News of 13 August 2026 accessed from <https://newtelegraphng.com/lawyers-demand-more-judges-courts-to-reduce-delays-in-justice-delivery/> on 15 August 2026 at 11:19Am.

[83] Ibid,

[84] Aebayo Folorunsho – Francis. ‘Senate Backs adding More Judges to Clear Case Backlog’ Punch Online News of 10 June 2026 accessed from <https://punchng.com/senate-backs-adding-more-judges-to-clear-case-backlog/> on 15 August 2026 at 11:28AM.

[85] Ochojila ( n 79).

[86] Kenneth Attavit, ‘CJN Calls for Prudent Use of Financial Resources Allocated to Nigerian Judiciary’ Independent Online News of 20 July 2026 accessed from <https://independent.ng/cjn-calls-for-prudent-use-of-financial-resources-allocated-to-nigerian-judiciary/> on 15 August 2026 at 11:36AM.

[87] Evince Uhurebor, ‘Nigeria’s Judiciary Must be Financially Independent from Executive – Mato’ New Telegraph Online News of 8 July 2026 accessed from <https://newtelegraphng.com/nigerias-judiciary-must-be-financially-independent-from-executive-mato/> on 15 August 2026 at 11:44AM.

[88] ibid.

[89] The Sun, ‘Osigwe;s Alarm on Corruption in the Judiciary’ accessed from <https://thesun.ng/osigwes-alarm-on-corruption-in-the-judiciary/> on 15 August 2026 at 11:53AM.

[90] ibid.

[91] ibid.

[92] ibid.

[93] ibid.

[94] Ochojila (n 79).

[95] Onozure Daniya, ‘Judicial Impunity Threatens Democracy, SAN’ Punch Online News of 1 June 2026 accessed from <https://punchng.com/judicial-impunity-threatens-democracy-san-warns/> on 15 August 2026 at 12:04PM.

[96] Nwokoro (n 76).

[97] Ochojila (n 79).

[98] Tribune Online, ‘Group Chides Withdrawal of Orderly of Rivers Judge who Gave Judgment Against Police’ accessed from <https://tribuneonlineng.com/group-chides-withdrawal-of-orderly-of-rivers-judge-who-gave-judgment-against-police/> on 15 August 2026 at 12:20PM.

[99] Ibid.

[100] Ochoji;a (n 79).

[101] Sunday Ejike, ‘CJN Urges Strong Financial Oversight, Digital Innovation to Strengthen Nigeria’s Judiciary’ Tribune Online News of 20 July 2026 accessed from <https://tribuneonlineng.com/cjn-urges-strong-financial-oversight-digital-innovation-to-strengthen-nigerias-judiciary/> on 15 August 2026 at 12:38PM.

[102] Nwokoro (n 76).

[103] Ochojila (n 79).

[104] (2008) 19 NWLR (Pt 1120) 419.

[105] (2008) 5 NWLR (Part 1080) 227.

[106] (2000) 7 NWLR (pt. 665) 481; (2002) LPELR-1258(SC).

[107] (1994) 9 NWLR (Pt 366) 27-28.

[108] (2002) AHRLR 159 (NgSC 2001).

[109] (2016) LPELR-40013 (SC).

[110] (2014) LPELR-22014(SC)

Follow Our WhatsApp Channel _______________________________________________________________________ Groundbreaking Guide For Lawyers: Adigwe Publishes ‘Artificial Intelligence For Lawyers’ With Free Research eBook The book also examines Nigeria's legal ecosystem, focusing on the LPELR and NBA AI Guidelines. As a bonus, every purchase comes with a FREE eBook titled: How to Use the AI Features in LegalPedia and LawPavilion. 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 Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe Esq., ACIarb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director at the Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria. _______________________________________________________________________ “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

________________________________________________________________________ [A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials

Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation _______________________________________________________________________