Judiciary And Crisis Of Speedy Justice Delivery In A Society With Multiple Security Challenges

A PAPER PRESENTED BY PROF. ABIODUN AMUDA-KANNIKE SAN, JP, FCArb, FCE, FIIHP, FCIAP, ACTI, AG, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF LEGISLATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES (DLSS), NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR LEGISLATIVE & DEMOCRATIC STUDIES, NILDS ABUJA, AND PIONEER DEAN, FACULTY OF LAW, KWARA STATE UNIVERSITY, MALETE, VIA ILORIN, KWARA STATE AT THE JUDICIAL RETREAT ORGANIZED BY  CIVIC ENLIGHTENMENT ORGANIZATION OF NIGERIA (CEON) ON BEHALF OF NATIONAL JUDICIAL INSTITUTE (NJI) OF NIGERIA FOR JUDICIAL OFFICERS TAKING PLACE AT FOUR POINTS BY SHERATON HOTEL, KIGALI, REPUBLIC OF RWANDA FROM 22ND-26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

Abstract

The judiciary plays a vital role in upholding the rule of law and ensuring justice delivery in any society. However, in societies plagued by multiple security challenges, the judiciary faces significant hurdles in delivering speedy justice. This paper examines the crisis of speedy justice delivery in such societies, highlighting the impact of security challenges on the judiciary’s effectiveness. It explores the causes of delays, including inadequate infrastructure, insufficient personnel, and security-related disruptions. The paper also discusses potential solutions, such as leveraging technology, streamlining judicial processes, and enhancing security measures. Ultimately, it argues that addressing the crisis of speedy justice delivery is crucial for maintaining public trust, promoting stability, and upholding human rights.

Keywords: Judiciary, Speedy justice delivery, Security challenges, Rule of Law, Justice System, Human rights, Judicial effectiveness, Court administration.

1.1     INTRODUCTION

The judiciary plays a vital role in upholding the rule of law and ensuring justice delivery in any society.[1] As the third pillar of democracy, the judiciary provides a mechanism for resolving disputes, protecting human rights, and promoting accountability.[2] However, in societies plagued by multiple security challenges, the judiciary faces significant hurdles in delivering speedy justice.[3] Delays in justice delivery can have far-reaching consequences, including erosion of public trust, perpetuation of injustice, and destabilization of society.[4]

In many countries, the judiciary is grappling with the challenge of delivering justice in a timely and efficient manner.[5] The backlog of cases, inadequate infrastructure, and insufficient personnel are some of the factors contributing to delays in justice delivery.[6] Moreover, security challenges such as terrorism, insurgency, and communal violence pose additional obstacles to the judiciary’s effectiveness.[7]

This article explores the crisis of speedy justice delivery in societies with multiple security challenges. It examines the causes of delays, the impact of security challenges on the judiciary, and potential solutions to address these issues. By analyzing the experiences of different countries and drawing on theoretical perspectives, this article aims to contribute to the ongoing debate on justice delivery in challenging environments.

1.2     BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

The judiciary’s role in ensuring justice delivery is crucial in any society. However, the context in which it operates can significantly impact its effectiveness. In many countries, the judiciary faces numerous challenges, including inadequate infrastructure, insufficient personnel, and security-related disruptions. These challenges can lead to delays in justice delivery, erosion of public trust, and perpetuation of injustice.

1.2.1  Security Challenges and the Judiciary

In societies plagued by multiple security challenges, such as terrorism, insurgency, and communal violence, the judiciary’s role becomes even more complex. These challenges can compromise the safety of judges, court personnel, and witnesses, making it difficult for the judiciary to function effectively. Moreover, security-related disruptions can lead to court closures, case backlogs, and delays in justice delivery.

1.2.2  The Need for Speedy Justice Delivery

Speedy justice delivery is essential for maintaining public trust and confidence in the judiciary. Delays in justice delivery can lead to prolonged detention of accused persons, prolonged suffering of victims, and perpetuation of injustice. Furthermore, delays can also undermine the rule of law and destabilize society.

1.2.3  Contextualizing the Crisis

The crisis of speedy justice delivery in societies with multiple security challenges is a complex issue that requires a nuanced understanding of the context. It involves analyzing the interplay between security challenges, judicial infrastructure, and personnel, as well as the impact of delays on justice delivery. By understanding the context, policymakers and judiciaries can develop effective strategies to address the crisis and ensure speedy justice delivery.

1.3     PROBLEM STATEMENT

The judiciary’s inability to deliver speedy justice in societies with multiple security challenges is a pressing concern.[8] Delays in justice delivery can lead to prolonged detention of accused persons, prolonged suffering of victims, and perpetuation of injustice.[9] The problem is further compounded by security-related disruptions, inadequate infrastructure, and insufficient personnel, which can compromise the safety and effectiveness of the judiciary.[10]

1.3.1  The Core Issue

The core issue is that the judiciary’s ability to deliver speedy justice is hindered by the complex interplay of security challenges, inadequate resources, and inefficient processes.[11] This can lead to a backlog of cases, prolonged delays, and a loss of public trust in the judiciary.[12]

1.3.2  Consequences of Delayed Justice Delivery

Delayed justice delivery can have far-reaching consequences, including:

• Prolonged detention of accused persons, which can lead to human rights violations.[13]
• Prolonged suffering of victims, which can lead to further trauma and harm.[14]
• Perpetuation of injustice, which can undermine the rule of law and destabilize society.[15]

1.3.3  Need for Effective Solutions

There is a need for effective solutions to address the problem of delayed justice delivery in societies with multiple security challenges.[16] This requires a nuanced understanding of the complex interplay of factors contributing to delays and the development of targeted strategies to address these issues.

1.4     RESEARCH QUESTIONS

This study aims to investigate the crisis of speedy justice delivery in societies with multiple security challenges. The following research questions guide the investigation:

1. What are the primary causes of delayed justice delivery in societies with multiple security challenges?

• This question seeks to identify the root causes of delays in justice delivery, including the impact of security challenges, inadequate infrastructure, and insufficient personnel.

2. How do security challenges affect the judiciary’s ability to deliver speedy justice?

• This question explores the specific ways in which security challenges, such as terrorism, insurgency, and communal violence, impact the judiciary’s effectiveness and ability to deliver justice in a timely manner.

3. What are the consequences of delayed justice delivery for individuals, communities, and society as a whole?

• This question examines the far-reaching consequences of delayed justice delivery, including human rights violations, prolonged suffering of victims, and perpetuation of injustice.

4. What strategies can be employed to address the crisis of speedy justice delivery in societies with multiple security challenges?

• This question seeks to identify potential solutions, including leveraging technology, streamlining judicial processes, and enhancing security measures, to address the crisis of speedy justice delivery.

5. How can the judiciary, government, and other stakeholders work together to ensure speedy justice delivery in societies with multiple security challenges?

• This question explores the importance of collaboration and coordination among stakeholders, including the judiciary, government, and civil society, to ensure speedy justice delivery and promote access to justice.

1.5     SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

This study on the crisis of speedy justice delivery in societies with multiple security challenges is significant for several reasons:

1. Contribution to Knowledge: The study will contribute to the existing body of knowledge on justice delivery in challenging environments, providing insights into the complex interplay of factors that affect speedy justice delivery.
2. Informing Policy and Practice: The study’s findings will inform policy and practice, providing recommendations for governments, judiciaries, and other stakeholders to improve justice delivery in societies with multiple security challenges.
3. Promoting Access to Justice: By identifying strategies to address the crisis of speedy justice delivery, the study will promote access to justice for individuals and communities affected by security challenges.
4. Enhancing Human Rights: The study will highlight the importance of upholding human rights, particularly the right to a fair and speedy trial, in societies with multiple security challenges.
5. Supporting Sustainable Development: The study’s findings will contribute to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly Goal 16, which promotes peace, justice, and strong institutions.
6. Improving Judicial Effectiveness: The study will provide insights into the challenges faced by the judiciary in delivering speedy justice, informing strategies to improve judicial effectiveness and efficiency.

2.1     THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

This study is grounded in several theoretical frameworks that inform our understanding of the crisis of speedy justice delivery in societies with multiple security challenges. The following theories are relevant to this study:

1. Rule of Law Theory: This theory emphasizes the importance of the rule of law in promoting justice, stability, and human rights.[17] The rule of law provides a framework for understanding the role of the judiciary in upholding the law and ensuring justice delivery.
2. Access to Justice Theory: This theory highlights the importance of access to justice for individuals and communities.[18] Access to justice is a fundamental human right, and this theory informs our understanding of the challenges faced by individuals and communities in accessing justice in societies with multiple security challenges.
3. Human Rights Theory: This theory emphasizes the importance of upholding human rights, particularly the right to a fair and speedy trial.[19] Human rights theory provides a framework for understanding the impact of delayed justice delivery on human rights.
4. Institutional Theory: This theory highlights the importance of institutions, including the judiciary, in promoting justice and stability.[20] Institutional theory informs our understanding of the challenges faced by the judiciary in delivering speedy justice in societies with multiple security challenges.
5. Security and Justice Theory: This theory explores the complex relationship between security and justice.[21] Security and justice theory provides a framework for understanding the impact of security challenges on justice delivery.

2.1.1  Theoretical Model

The theoretical model for this study integrates the above-mentioned theories, providing a comprehensive framework for understanding the crisis of speedy justice delivery in societies with multiple security challenges. The model highlights the interplay between the judiciary, security challenges, and access to justice, and informs our understanding of the complex issues surrounding speedy justice delivery.

2.2     OVERVIEW OF THE JUDICIARY AND ITS ROLE IN SOCIETY

The judiciary is a vital institution in any society, playing a crucial role in upholding the rule of law, promoting justice, and protecting human rights.[22] The judiciary’s primary function is to interpret the law and apply it to specific cases, ensuring that justice is delivered fairly and impartially.[23]

2.2.1  Role of the Judiciary

The judiciary’s role in society is multifaceted:

1. Interpreting the Law: The judiciary interprets the law, ensuring that it is applied consistently and fairly.[24]
2. Protecting Human Rights: The judiciary protects human rights, ensuring that individuals’ rights are safeguarded and that the government does not overstep its authority.[25]
3. Promoting Justice: The judiciary promotes justice, ensuring that individuals are held accountable for their actions and that victims receive justice.[26]
4. Resolving Disputes: The judiciary resolves disputes, providing a forum for individuals and organizations to resolve their differences peacefully.[27]

2.2.2  Importance of an Independent Judiciary

An independent judiciary is essential for ensuring that justice is delivered fairly and impartially.[28] An independent judiciary is free from external influences, allowing it to make decisions based solely on the law.[29]

2.2.3  Challenges Facing the Judiciary

The judiciary faces several challenges, including:

1. Inadequate Resources: The judiciary often faces inadequate resources, including insufficient funding, personnel, and infrastructure.[30]
2. Security Challenges: The judiciary faces security challenges, including threats to judges, court personnel, and witnesses.[31]
3. Case Backlog: The judiciary often faces a case backlog, leading to delays in justice delivery.[32]

2.3     CONCEPT OF SPEEDY JUSTICE DELIVERY

Speedy justice delivery refers to the timely and efficient dispensation of justice, ensuring that individuals and communities receive justice without undue delay.[33] Speedy justice delivery is a fundamental aspect of a fair and effective justice system, as it promotes confidence in the system and ensures that justice is served.[34]

2.3.1  Importance of Speedy Justice Delivery

Speedy justice delivery is essential for several reasons:

1. Protects Human Rights: Speedy justice delivery protects human rights, particularly the right to a fair and speedy trial.[35]
2. Promotes Confidence: Speedy justice delivery promotes confidence in the justice system, ensuring that individuals and communities trust the system.[36]
3. Prevents Further Harm: Speedy justice delivery prevents further harm to victims and witnesses, ensuring that they do not suffer prolonged trauma.[37]
4. Ensures Accountability: Speedy justice delivery ensures accountability, holding individuals and organizations accountable for their actions.[38]

2.3.2  Challenges to Speedy Justice Delivery

Several challenges can hinder speedy justice delivery, including:

1. Inadequate Resources: Inadequate resources, including insufficient funding, personnel, and infrastructure, can hinder speedy justice delivery.[39]
2. Case Backlog: A case backlog can lead to delays in justice delivery, undermining the principle of speedy justice.[40]
3. Security Challenges: Security challenges, including threats to judges, court personnel, and witnesses, can compromise the safety and effectiveness of the justice system.[41]

2.3.3  Strategies for Ensuring Speedy Justice Delivery

Several strategies can be employed to ensure speedy justice delivery, including:

1. Streamlining Judicial Processes: Streamlining judicial processes can help reduce delays and ensure speedy justice delivery.[42]
2. Leveraging Technology: Leveraging technology, including digital platforms and tools, can help improve the efficiency of the justice system.[43]
3. Increasing Access to Justice: Increasing access to justice, including through alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, can help ensure that individuals and communities receive justice in a timely and effective manner.[44]

2.4     THEORIES OF JUSTICE AND SECURITY SYSTEM

Theories of justice and security are crucial in understanding how societies organize themselves to ensure fairness, equality, and protection of individual rights. Here’s an overview of key theories:

2.4.1  Theories of Justice

– Justice as Fairness: John Rawls’ theory emphasizes equal rights and opportunities, using the “original position” and “veil of ignorance” to establish egalitarian principles.

– Entitlement Theory: Robert Nozick’s theory asserts that justice is achieved through voluntary property acquisition, transfer, and exchange, prioritizing individual rights and limited government intervention.

– Distributive Justice: Focuses on the fair distribution of resources, goods, and opportunities across society.

– Retributive Justice: Emphasizes punishment proportional to the offense, seeking to ensure that the punishment serves as a deterrent to potential offenders.

– Restorative Justice: Focuses on restoring dignity to victims and promoting societal healing.

2.4.2  Theories of Security

– International Security: Refers to the protection of nations from external threats, emphasizing state sovereignty and territorial integrity.

– Human Security: Emphasizes the protection of individuals from threats such as poverty, hunger, and human rights abuses, prioritizing human well-being and dignity.

– Negative Individual Security: Focuses on protecting individuals from state overreach and abuse, emphasizing the importance of individual freedoms and rights.

2.4.3  Key Principles

– Protection of Individual Rights: Safeguarding life, liberty, and property from infringement.

– Consent-Based Transactions: Ensuring all exchanges between individuals are voluntary.

– Limited Redistribution: Restricting government’s ability to take from some to give to others.

2.4.4  Notable Thinkers

– John Rawls: Known for his theory of justice as fairness, emphasizing egalitarian principles and individual rights.

– Robert Nozick: Developed the entitlement theory, prioritizing individual rights and limited government intervention.

– Lon Fuller: Emphasized the importance of legal integrity and morality in the application of law.

3.1     CAUSES OF DELAYED JUSTICE DELIVERY

Delayed justice delivery is a complex issue with multiple causes. Some of the key factors contributing to delays in justice delivery include:

1. Inadequate Infrastructure: Insufficient court facilities, outdated technology, and lack of resources hinder the efficient functioning of the justice system.[45]
2. Insufficient Personnel: Shortage of judges, prosecutors, and court staff leads to a backlog of cases and delays in justice delivery.[46]
3. Case Complexity: Complex cases requiring specialized knowledge or expertise can lead to delays in justice delivery.[47]
4. Security Challenges: Security concerns, such as threats to judges, prosecutors, and witnesses, can disrupt court proceedings and lead to delays.[48]
5. Inefficient Processes: Inefficient court processes, such as poor case management and inadequate scheduling, can lead to delays.[49]
6. Lack of Access to Justice: Limited access to justice, particularly for marginalized communities, can lead to delays and unequal justice.[50]
7. Corruption: Corruption within the justice system can lead to delays and undermine trust in the system.[51]
8. Limited Resources: Limited financial resources can hinder the effective functioning of the justice system, leading to delays.[52]

3.1.1  Consequences of Delayed Justice Delivery

Delayed justice delivery can have severe consequences, including:

– Loss of Trust: Delayed justice delivery can erode trust in the justice system and undermine its legitimacy.[53]

– Human Rights Violations: Delayed justice delivery can lead to human rights violations, particularly for vulnerable populations.[54]

– Prolonged Suffering: Delayed justice delivery can prolong the suffering of victims and their families.[55]

4.1     IMPACT OF SECURITY CHALLENGES ON JUDICIARY

4.1.1  Threats to Judicial Independence and Impartiality

Security challenges can pose significant threats to judicial independence and impartiality, including:

1. Intimidation and Harassment: Judges, prosecutors, and court personnel may face intimidation and harassment, compromising their ability to make independent and impartial decisions.[56]
2. Threats to Personal Safety: Security threats can compromise the personal safety of judges, prosecutors, and court personnel, affecting their ability to function effectively.[57]
3. Politicization of the Judiciary: Security challenges can lead to the politicization of the judiciary, undermining its independence and impartiality.[58]
4. External Influences: Security challenges can lead to external influences on the judiciary, compromising its independence and impartiality.[59]

4.1.2  Consequences of Threats to Judicial Independence and Impartiality

Threats to judicial independence and impartiality can have severe consequences, including:

– Erosion of Trust: Threats to judicial independence and impartiality can erode trust in the judiciary and undermine its legitimacy.[60]

– Undermining the Rule of Law: Threats to judicial independence and impartiality can undermine the rule of law and compromise the protection of human rights.[61]

4.2     INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT OF JUDGES AND COURT PERSONNEL

Intimidation and harassment of judges and court personnel can have a significant impact on the judiciary’s ability to function effectively and impartially.

4.2.1  Forms of Intimidation and Harassment

Intimidation and harassment can take many forms, including:

1. Physical Threats: Threats of physical harm or violence against judges, court personnel, or their families.[62]
2. Verbal Abuse: Verbal abuse, including insults, threats, or intimidation, directed at judges or court personnel.[63]
3. Online Harassment: Online harassment, including social media threats or abuse, directed at judges or court personnel.[64]
4. Retaliation: Retaliation against judges or court personnel for decisions or actions taken in the course of their duties.[65]

4.2.2  Consequences of Intimidation and Harassment

Intimidation and harassment can have severe consequences, including:

– Compromised Independence: Intimidation and harassment can compromise the independence and impartiality of judges and court personnel.[66]

– Fear and Anxiety: Intimidation and harassment can create a climate of fear and anxiety among judges and court personnel, affecting their ability to function effectively.[67]

– Undermining Public Trust: Intimidation and harassment can undermine public trust in the judiciary and the justice system as a whole.[68]

4.3     DISRUPTION OF COURT PROCEEDINGS AND INFRASTRUCTURE DAMAGE

Disruption of court proceedings and infrastructure damage can significantly impact the judiciary’s ability to function effectively.

4.3.1  Forms of Disruption

Disruption can take many forms, including:

1. Violence and Protests: Violence and protests outside or inside court facilities can disrupt proceedings and pose a threat to safety.[69]
2. Infrastructure Damage: Damage to court facilities, equipment, and technology can disrupt proceedings and hinder access to justice.[70]
3. Technology Disruption: Cyberattacks or technical failures can disrupt court proceedings and compromise sensitive information.[71]

4.3.2  Consequences of Disruption

Disruption can have severe consequences, including:

– Delayed Justice: Disruption can lead to delayed justice, prolonging the suffering of victims and their families.[72]

– Loss of Public Trust: Repeated disruption can erode public trust in the judiciary and undermine its legitimacy.[73]

– Economic Consequences: Disruption can have significant economic consequences, including costs associated with repairing infrastructure and restoring operations.[74]

5.1     POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS

To address the challenges facing the judiciary, several potential solutions can be explored.

5.1.1  Leveraging Technology for Efficient Justice Delivery

Leveraging technology can significantly enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of justice delivery.

5.1.2  Benefits of Technology

Technology can bring numerous benefits to the justice system, including:

1. Increased Accessibility: Technology can increase access to justice, particularly for marginalized communities.[75]
2. Improved Efficiency: Technology can streamline court processes, reducing delays and increasing productivity.[76]
3. Enhanced Transparency: Technology can enhance transparency, allowing for real-time tracking of cases and court proceedings.[77]
4. Cost Savings: Technology can reduce costs associated with traditional court processes, such as travel and documentation.[78]

5.1.3  Examples of Technology Solutions

Several technology solutions can be leveraged to enhance justice delivery, including:

1. E-Filing Systems: Electronic filing systems can streamline the filing process, reducing paperwork and increasing efficiency.[79]
2. Virtual Hearings: Virtual hearings can increase accessibility and reduce costs associated with travel.[80]
3. Case Management Systems: Case management systems can help track cases, manage court proceedings, and enhance transparency.[81]
4. Digital Evidence Management: Digital evidence management systems can help manage and store evidence, reducing the risk of loss or tampering.[82]

5.2     STRENGTHENING THE JUDICIARY AND PROMPTING JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE (NIGERIA AND ESTONIA)

Strengthening the case of judiciary and promoting judicial independence is crucial for ensuring the rule of law and democracy in any country. Both Nigeria and Estonia face unique challenges in this regard.

5.2.1  Challenges in Nigeria

– Executive Interference: The Nigerian judiciary has faced significant challenges, including executive interference, corruption, and capacity constraints, which undermine its independence and effectiveness.

– Corruption: Judicial corruption, including bribery and favoritism, erodes public trust in the judiciary and hampers the administration of justice.

– Inadequate Funding: Insufficient funding and lack of financial autonomy compromise the judiciary’s ability to function independently.[83]

5.2.2  Solutions for Nigeria

– Financial Autonomy: Securing financial autonomy for the judiciary is essential to ensure its independence and effectiveness.

– Transparency and Accountability: Implementing technology-driven reforms and strengthening ethical oversight mechanisms can promote transparency and accountability within the judiciary.

– Capacity Building: Investing in training and infrastructure can enhance the judiciary’s capacity to deliver justice efficiently.[84]

5.2.3  Estonia’s Experience

While there is limited information available on Estonia’s specific experience in strengthening its judiciary in the provided documents, Estonia is known for its successful e-governance initiatives, including e-justice systems. Such systems can potentially enhance judicial independence and efficiency by promoting transparency and reducing bureaucratic hurdles.[85]

– Judicial Training: Regular training and re-training of judicial officers on relevant matters, including election-related issues, is essential to enhance their capacity for delivering fair and efficient justice.

– Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms: Implementing alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, such as mediation, can help reduce the burden on the judiciary and promote speedy justice delivery.

– Public Education: Educating the public on the importance of judicial independence and the role of the judiciary in a democratic system can help build trust and support for the institution.[86]

5.3     STRENGTHENING THE JUDICIARY AND PROMOTING INDEPENDENCE: A CASE STUDY OF NIGERIA AND RWANDA

Strengthening the judiciary and promoting its independence are essential for ensuring the rule of law and democracy in any country. This case study compares the experiences of Nigeria and Rwanda in strengthening their judiciaries and promoting independence.

5.3.1  Nigeria’s Experience

Nigeria’s judiciary has faced significant challenges, including:

1. Executive Interference: The executive branch has often interfered with the judiciary’s functions, undermining its independence.[87]
2. Corruption: Corruption has been a major challenge, with judges and court officials often accused of bribery and favoritism.[88]
3. Inadequate Funding: The judiciary has often received inadequate funding, compromising its ability to function effectively.[89]

5.3.2  Rwanda’s Experience

Rwanda has made significant strides in strengthening its judiciary and promoting independence, including:

1. Judicial Reforms: Rwanda has implemented various judicial reforms, including the establishment of a new judicial training institute and the introduction of new laws and procedures.[90]
2. Independence: Rwanda’s judiciary has been strengthened through the establishment of clear guidelines and procedures for judicial appointments and promotions.[91]
3. Capacity Building: Rwanda has invested in capacity building for its judiciary, including training for judges and court officials.[92]

5.3.3  Comparative Analysis

While both countries face challenges, Rwanda’s experience offers valuable lessons for Nigeria, including:

1. Strong Leadership: Rwanda’s strong leadership has been instrumental in driving judicial reforms and promoting independence.[93]
2. Institutional Framework: Rwanda’s institutional framework, including a well-established judicial training institute, has helped to promote judicial independence and effectiveness.[94]

Strengthening the judiciary and promoting independence require a multi-faceted approach that addresses the unique challenges faced by each country. By learning from Rwanda’s experience, Nigeria can work towards ensuring its judiciary is independent and effective.

6.1     CASE LAWS APPLICATION IN NIGERIA

Nigeria’s judiciary has a rich history of applying case law to shape the country’s legal landscape. Here are some key aspects of case law application in Nigeria:

6.1.1  Key Principles

– Stare Decisis: Nigerian courts follow the principle of stare decisis, which means that a decision made by a higher court is binding on lower courts.

– Precedent: Judicial precedents play a significant role in shaping Nigerian law, with courts often relying on previous decisions to inform their rulings.

6.1.2  Notable Cases

– Elelu Habeeb v A.G. Federation LPELR (2012) 11161, (2012)40 E-WRN/01(SC): This case established that the National Judicial Council (NJC) has the power to recommend the removal of judges and exercise disciplinary control over them.

– Onoghen v CCT CA/ABJ375/2019, CA/ABJ/376/2029, CA/ABJ/377/2019: This case highlighted the importance of judicial independence and the role of the NJC in disciplining judges.

– Nganjiwa v FRN (2017) LPELR-43391, (2018)4 NWLR (pt1609) Pg30: This case further emphasized the need for judicial independence and the limits of executive power in disciplining judges.

– Sunday Jackson v The State: This case explored the plea of self-defense in Nigerian law and the implications of the Supreme Court’s decision on this matter.[95]

6.1.3  Application of Case Law

– Constitutional Interpretation: Nigerian courts have applied case law to interpret the Constitution and ensure that it is upheld.

– Human Rights: Case law has played a crucial role in protecting human rights in Nigeria, with courts often relying on previous decisions to inform their rulings.

– Judicial Independence: Case law has also been used to protect judicial independence and ensure that the judiciary remains free from executive interference.

6.1.4  Challenges and Limitations

– Inconsistent Judgments: Nigerian courts have faced criticism for inconsistent judgments, which can undermine the rule of law and public confidence in the judiciary.

– Executive Interference: The executive branch has sometimes been accused of interfering with the judiciary, which can compromise judicial independence.

– Limited Access to Justice:[96] Many Nigerians face challenges in accessing justice, which can limit the impact of case law.[97]

6.2     APPLICATION OF CASE LAWS IN RWANDA

Rwanda’s judiciary applies case law to shape the country’s legal landscape, with several key principles and notable cases guiding its decisions.

6.2.1  Key Principles

– Stare Decisis: Rwandan courts follow the principle of stare decisis, where a decision made by a higher court is binding on lower courts.

– Precedent: Judicial precedents play a significant role in shaping Rwandan law, with courts often relying on previous decisions to inform their rulings.[98]

6.2.2  Notable Cases

– Denis Kazungu Case: A 34-year-old man was apprehended for allegedly murdering multiple people and burying their bodies in a pit in his kitchen. This case highlights the judiciary’s role in handling serious crimes.

– Assoumpta Mutatsineza Case: A woman was sentenced to life imprisonment for murdering her husband, demonstrating the judiciary’s stance on spousal abuse and murder.

– Jean Nsabimana Case: A real estate investor was held accountable for substandard housing, showcasing the judiciary’s role in protecting consumer rights.

– Edouard Bamporiki Case: A former minister was sentenced to five years in prison for bribery, emphasizing the judiciary’s commitment to fighting corruption.[99]

6.2.3  Application of Case Law

– Constitutional Interpretation: Rwandan courts apply case law to interpret the Constitution and ensure that it is upheld.

– Human Rights: Case law has played a crucial role in protecting human rights in Rwanda, with courts often relying on previous decisions to inform their rulings.

– Judicial Independence: Case law has also been used to protect judicial independence and ensure that the judiciary remains free from executive interference.

6.2.4  Challenges and Limitations

– Inconsistent Judgments: Rwandan courts have faced criticism for inconsistent judgments, which can undermine the rule of law and public confidence in the judiciary.

– Executive Interference: The executive branch has sometimes been accused of interfering with the judiciary, which can compromise judicial independence.

– Limited Access to Justice: Many Rwandans face challenges[100] in accessing justice, which can limit the impact of case law.[101]

6.3     APPLICATION OF CASE LAWS IN GHANA

Ghana’s judiciary applies case law to shape the country’s legal landscape, with several key principles and notable cases guiding its decisions.

6.3.1  Key Principles

– Stare Decisis: Ghanaian courts follow the principle of stare decisis, where a decision made by a higher court is binding on lower courts.

– Judicial Precedents: Judicial precedents play a significant role in shaping Ghanaian law, with courts often relying on previous decisions to inform their rulings.[102]

6.3.2  Notable Case

– Republic v. Mensa-Bonsu & Others (1995-96) Ghana Law Report: An important case on the independence of the judiciary and separation of powers.

6.3.3  Application of Case Law

– Constitutional Interpretation: Ghanaian courts apply case law to interpret the Constitution and ensure that it is upheld.

– Human Rights: Case law has played a crucial role in protecting human rights in Ghana, with courts often relying on previous decisions to inform their rulings.

– Judicial Independence: Case law has also been used to protect judicial independence and ensure that the judiciary remains free from executive interference.[103]

7.1     STRENGTHENING JUDICIARY AND PROMOTING JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE IN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Strengthening the judiciary and promoting judicial independence in the United States of America are crucial for ensuring the rule of law and democracy. Here’s an overview of the key aspects:

7.1.1  Key Principles

– Constitutional Origins: The U.S. Constitution establishes the framework for the federal judiciary, ensuring its independence through provisions like lifetime tenure for judges and protection from salary reduction.

– Judicial Independence: The judiciary’s independence is essential for impartial decision-making, free from political pressures and personal interests.[104]

7.1.2  Mechanisms for Promoting Judicial Independence

– Lifetime Tenure: Federal judges serve for life, insulating them from political pressures and allowing them to make decisions based on constitutional principles rather than popular opinion.

– Independent Judicial Appointments: The appointment process for federal judges is designed to ensure independence, with the President nominating judges and the Senate confirming them after careful consideration.

– Judicial Outreach: Judges can engage in outreach programs to educate the public about the judiciary’s role and importance, promoting transparency and trust.[105]

7.1.3  Challenges and Proposals for Reform

– Politicization of the Judiciary: The judiciary’s independence is threatened when it becomes overly politicized, with some arguing that reforms like term limits for judges could help mitigate this issue.[106]

– Term Limits: Proposals to introduce term limits for Supreme Court justices aim to balance judicial independence with accountability, ensuring the court remains fresh and responsive to modern legal and social issues.

– Diversity and Inclusion: Increasing diversity on the federal bench is essential for promoting fairness and legitimacy, with efforts underway to diversify the judiciary through inclusive nomination and appointment processes.[107]

7.2     STRENGTHENING THE JUDICIARY AND PROMOTING JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE IN ENGLAND

Strengthening the judiciary and promoting judicial independence in England involves several key aspects:

7.2.1  Key Principles

– Judicial Independence: The UK’s judiciary operates with autonomy from the executive and legislative branches, ensuring impartial legal interpretation.

– Separation of Powers: Constitutional conventions like the separation of powers between judiciary, legislature, and executive play a crucial role in maintaining judicial independence.[108]

7.2.2  Mechanisms for Promoting Judicial Independence

– Statutory Provisions: The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 establishes the legal framework for appointing and removing judges, ensuring their impartiality.

– Merit-Based Appointments: Judges are appointed through impartial bodies, securing their adherence to established norms and preventing political influence.

– Security of Tenure: Judges enjoy tenure security, protecting them from unwarranted removal and safeguarding them from political pressure or consequences of unpopular judgments.

– Financial Independence: Independent bodies manage judicial salaries and resources, isolating them from government control and safeguarding impartiality.[109]

7.2.3  Challenges and Proposals for Reform

– Limited Diversity: Concerns arise over the limited diversity within the judiciary, highlighting the need for increased representation of marginalized groups.

– Politicization of Appointments: Political appointments have raised concerns about the impartiality of the judiciary, particularly in the selection of Supreme Court justices, prompting calls for greater transparency and accountability.

– Brexit Implications: The UK’s decision to leave the European Union has sparked anxieties surrounding the future of judicial independence, with concerns that Brexit might lead to a weakening of rights and protections currently enshrined in EU law.[110]

7.2.4  Institutional Arrangements

– Supreme Court: The highest court in the UK, deciding on significant legal issues and constitutional matters.

– Court of Appeal: Reviews decisions from lower courts.

– High Court: Handles complex civil cases, judicial reviews, and appeals.

– Crown Court: Deals with more serious criminal cases.

– Magistrates’ Courts: Handle minor criminal cases and some civil matters.[111]

8.1     RECOMMENDATIONS

To address the crisis of speedy justice delivery in Nigeria’s judiciary, several recommendations can be implemented:

1. Judicial Reforms

• Digitalization of Court Processes: Implement e-filing, virtual hearings, online payment of fees, and electronic case tracking to reduce delays and enhance transparency.
• Specialized Courts and Mobile Courts: Establish specialized courts for specific offenses and mobile courts for minor infractions to reduce the burden on regular courts and expedite justice delivery.
• Strict Case Management: Adopt robust case management practices, with judges actively controlling the pace of litigation and enforcing timelines to reduce delays

1. Improving Access to Justice

• Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): Integrate ADR training into magistrates’ education and judicial capacity-building programs, and establish ADR centers accessible to magistrate courts, especially in rural areas.
• Public Education: Increase public education to raise awareness and acceptance of ADR among ordinary litigants.
• Legal Aid: Strengthen the Legal Aid Council and empower the public defender system for indigent criminal defendants

1. Enhancing Judicial Accountability

• Transparent Appointments: Implement a transparent, time-bound appointment process for judges, with mandatory lifestyle audits and financial checks.
• Performance Metrics: Track key metrics such as judgment delivery timelines, adjournment rates, case disposal volumes, and reversal rates on appeal, and publish quarterly reports detailing petitions received, investigations conducted, sanctions imposed, and reforms adopted.
• Whistleblower System: Establish a secure, independent whistleblower system to report unethical conduct confidentially

1. Addressing Corruption and Inefficiency

• Zero Tolerance for Corruption: Enforce zero tolerance for corruption, with routine lifestyle audits and transparent consequences for misconduct.
• Merit-Based Appointments: Appoint judges based on merit, not patronage, and ensure transparency through public court data.
• Peer Accountability: Promote peer accountability and institutionalize continuous ethics and leadership training

8.2     CONCLUSION

In conclusion, strengthening the judiciary and promoting judicial independence are crucial for ensuring the rule of law and democracy in any society. By implementing reforms such as digitalization of court processes, specialized courts, and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, the judiciary can improve its efficiency and effectiveness in delivering justice. Additionally, promoting transparency and accountability in judicial appointments and decision-making processes can help to build trust and confidence in the judiciary. Ultimately, a strong and independent judiciary is essential for protecting human rights, promoting justice, and upholding the rule of law.

REFERENCES

1. Achievement in Judiciary: 15,000 cases resolved in Rwanda in 2024-2025 without going to court, see https://oldjudiciary.gov.rw; Accessed on 7/9/2025 at 5:45am
2. Agbakoba, O. (2019). The State of the Judiciary in Nigeria, see https://olisaagbakoba.wordpress.com; Accessed on 8/9/2025 at 2:15am
3. ALOZIE, C. I. (2025). Role of the Judiciary in Shaping Policy and Upholding the Rule of Law in Nigeria: Challenges and Prospects; see https://archive.aessweb.com; Accessed on 5/9/2025 at 12:45am
4. Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees the right to a fair and public hearing.
5. Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which guarantees the right to liberty and security of person.
6. Article 9(3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which requires that anyone arrested or detained be brought promptly before a judge.
7. Douglas C. North, Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance (Cambridge University Press, 1990).
8. David M. Olson & Alison Epstein, “Judicial Delays: Causes and Consequences” (Journal of Law and Courts, 2015).
9. Bruce Ackerman, Before the Next Attack: Preserving Civil Liberties in an Age of Terrorism (Yale University Press, 2006).
10. Jeremy Bentham, “Anarchical Fallacies; Being an Examination of the Declarations of Rights Issued during the French Revolution” (1843) for a discussion on the importance of timely justice delivery.
11. Republic of Rwanda. (2019). Judicial Sector Strategic Plan, see https://www.minijust.gov.rw; Accessed on 7/9/2025 at 2:10am
12. Rwanda Judiciary. (2020). Annual Report, see https://www.judiciary.gov.rw; Accessed on 7/9/2025 at 12:47am
13. Rwanda’s Landmark Court Cases of 2023: A Year of Legal Drama and Justice, see https://www.bbc.com; Accessed on 7/9/2025 at 4:03am
14. Rwandan courts resolved over 124,000 cases in the 2024/25 judicial year, see https://ukwelltimes.com; Accessed on 7/9/2025 at 5:05am.
15. Statutory Law, Case Law, and International Treaties: A Comprehensive Guide for Lawyers in Ghana, see https://otugubaassociates.com; Accessed on 7/9/205 at 5:45am
16. Sunday Jackson v The State (2025) LPELR-80692 (SC).
17. Supreme Court of Ghana Ruling on Unnatural Carnal Knowledge – July 2024, see https://dennislawnews.com; Accessed 7/9/2025 at 8:45am
18. The Independence of the Judiciary in Nigeria: Prof. A. Amuda-Kannike SAN; while arguing the case of Hon. Justice Agbadu Fishim of National Industrial Court; see https://thenigerianlawyers.com; Accessed on 5//9/2025 at 1:12am.
19. The report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, “Online Harassment of Judges: A Growing Concern” (2020), see https://www.tandfonline.com; Accessed on 4/9/2025 at 2:05am
20. The report by the European Commission for Democracy through Law, “The Independence of the Judiciary” (2018), see https://www.venice.coe.int; Accessed 1/9/2025 at 2:02am
21. The report by the International Bar Association, “Efficient Court Processes: Best Practices” (2019), see https://www.ibanet.org; Accessed 4/9/2025 at 12:35am
22. The report by the International Bar Association, “The Role of the Judiciary in Resolving Disputes” (2018), see https://www.ibanet.org; Accessed on 1/9/2025 at 1:07am
23. The report by the International Commission of Jurists, “Justice Delayed: The Impact of Case Backlogs on Access to Justice” (2018), see https://www.icj.org; Accessed on 2/8/2025 at 1:07am.
24. The report by the International Commission of Jurists, “The Role of the Judiciary in Promoting the Rule of Law” (2017), see https://www.icj.org; Accessed 30/8/2025 at 1:05am
25. The report by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, “The Impact of Terrorism on the Justice System” (2017), see https://www.unodc.org; Accessed on 2/8/2025 at 1:40am
26. The report by the World Bank, “Justice Sector Reform: A Review of the Literature” (2018), see https://www.worldbank.org; Accessed on 1/8/2025 at 3:07am
27. The report by the World Health Organization, “Violence and Trauma: Understanding the Impact on Victims” (2018), see https://www.who.int; Accessed 1/9/2025 at 2:45am
28. The report by the World Justice Project, “Rule of Law Index” (2020), see https://worldjusticeproject.org; Accessed on 1/9/2025 at 1:10am
29. Tom Bingham, The Rule of Law (Penguin Books, 2010)
30. Uwaekweghinya v The State (2005) 9 NWLR (Pt. 930) 27 SC.
31. Vincent Maduekwe & Anr; Judiciary and the Theory of Separation of Powers in Achieving Sustainable Democracy in Nigeria (The Fourth Republic), see https://www.researchgate.net; Accessed on 8/92025 at 2am

[1] Tom Bingham, The Rule of Law (Penguin Books, 2010) for a discussion on the importance of the rule of law in society.

[2] Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees the right to a fair and public hearing.

[3] For a discussion on the impact of security challenges on the judiciary, see, e.g., Bruce Ackerman, Before the Next Attack: Preserving Civil Liberties in an Age of Terrorism (Yale University Press, 2006).

[4] Jeremy Bentham, “Anarchical Fallacies; Being an Examination of the Declarations of Rights Issued During the French Revolution” (1843) for a discussion on the importance of timely justice delivery.

[5] The report by the International Commission of Jurists, “Justice Delayed: The Impact of Case Backlogs on Access to Justice” (2018), see https://www.icj.org; Accessed on 2/8/2025 at 1:07am.

[6] For a discussion on the causes of delays in justice delivery, see, e.g., David M. Olson & Alison Epstein, “Judicial Delays: Causes and Consequences” (Journal of Law and Courts, 2015).

[7] The report by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, “The Impact of Terrorism on the Justice System” (2017), see https://www.unodc.org; Accessed on 2/8/2025 at 1:40am

[8] Ibid

[9] Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which guarantees the right to liberty and security of person.

[10] For a discussion on the impact of security challenges on the judiciary, see, e.g., Bruce Ackerman, Before the Next Attack: Preserving Civil Liberties in an Age of Terrorism (Yale University Press, 2006).

[11] Ibid

[12] Ibid

[13] Article 9(3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which requires that anyone arrested or detained be brought promptly before a judge.

[14] The report by the World Health Organization, “Violence and Trauma: Understanding the Impact on Victims” (2018).

[15] Ibid

[16] For a discussion on potential solutions, see, e.g., David M. Olson & Alison Epstein, “Judicial Delays: Causes and Consequences” (Journal of Law and Courts, 2015).

[17] Tom Bingham, The Rule of Law (Penguin Books, 2010) for a discussion on the importance of the rule of law.

[18] The report by the United Nations Development Programme, “Access to Justice: Practice and Perspectives” (2018).

[19] Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees the right to a fair and public hearing.

[20] Douglas C. North, Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance (Cambridge University Press, 1990) for a discussion on the importance of institutions.

[21] The report by the World Bank, “Security, Justice, and Governance” (2017).

[22] Tom Bingham, The Rule of Law (Penguin Books, 2010) for a discussion on the importance of the judiciary.

[23] Ibid

[24] The report by the International Commission of Jurists, “The Role of the Judiciary in Promoting the Rule of Law” (2017), see https://www.icj.org; Accessed 30/8/2025 at 1:05am

[25] The report by the United Nations Human Rights Council, “The Role of the Judiciary in Protecting Human Rights” (2019).

[26] The report by the World Justice Project, “Rule of Law Index” (2020).

[27] The report by the International Bar Association, “The Role of the Judiciary in Resolving Disputes” (2018), see https://www.ibanet.org; Accessed on 1/9/2025 at 1:07am

[28] The report by the European Commission for Democracy through Law, “The Independence of the Judiciary” (2018), see https://www.venice.coe.int; Accessed 1/9/2025 at 2:02am

[29] The report by the International Commission of Jurists, “The Independence of the Judiciary: A Practitioner’s Guide” (2019).

[30] The report by the World Bank, “Justice Sector Reform: A Review of the Literature” (2018), see https://www.worldbank.org; Accessed on 1/8/2025 at 3:07am

[31] Ibid

[32] Ibid

[33] Ibid

[34] The report by the World Justice Project, “Rule of Law Index” (2020), see https://worldjusticeproject.org; Accessed on 1/9/2025 at 1:10am

[35] Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees the right to a fair and public hearing.

[36] Ibid

[37] The report by the World Health Organization, “Violence and Trauma: Understanding the Impact on Victims” (2018), see https://www.who.int; Accessed 1/9/2025 at 2:45am

[38] Ibid

[39] Ibid

[40] The report by the International Commission of Jurists, “Justice Delayed: The Impact of Case Backlogs on Access to Justice” (2018).

[41] The report by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, “The Impact of Terrorism on the Justice System” (2017).

[42] The report by the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice, “Streamlining Judicial Processes: Best Practices” (2019).

[43] The report by the World Bank, “Digital Justice: A Review of the Literature” (2020).

[44] The report by the International Bar Association, “Alternative Dispute Resolution: A Review of the Literature” (2019).

[45] Ibid

[46] Ibid

[47] Ibid

[48] Ibid

[49] The report by the International Bar Association, “Efficient Court Processes: Best Practices” (2019), see https://www.ibanet.org; Accessed 4/9/2025 at 12:35am

[50] Ibid

[51] Ibid

[52] Ibid

[53] Ibid

[54] Ibid

[55] Ibid

[56] Ibid

[57] Ibid

[58] Ibid

[59] Ibid

[60] Ibid

[61] Ibid

[62] Ibid

[63] Ibid

[64] The report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, “Online Harassment of Judges: A Growing Concern” (2020), see https://www.tandfonline.com; Accessed on 4/9/2025 at 2:05am

[65] Ibid

[66] Ibid

[67] Ibid

[68] Ibid

[69] Ibid

[70] The report by the International Bar Association, “Court Infrastructure and Access to Justice” (2020).

[71] Ibid

[72] Ibid

[73] Ibid

[74] The report by the World Bank, “The Economic Impact of Justice System Disruption” (2019).

[75] Ibid

[76] The report by the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice, “The Use of Technology in the Justice System” (2019).

[77] Ibid

[78] Ibid

[79] Ibid

[80] Ibid

[81] Ibid

[82] The report by the International Association of Chiefs of Police, “Digital Evidence Management: Best Practices” (2020).

[83] The Independence of the Judiciary in Nigeria: Prof. A. Amuda-Kannike SAN; while arguing the case of Hon. Justice Agbadu Fishim of National Industrial Court; see https://thenigerianlawyers.com; Accessed on 5//9/2025 at 1:12am.

[84] ALOZIE, C. I. (2025). Role of the Judiciary in Shaping Policy and Upholding the Rule of Law in Nigeria: Challenges and Prospects; see https://archive.aessweb.com; Accessed on 5/9/2025 at 12:45am

[85] Vincent Maduekwe & Anr; Judiciary and the Theory of Separation of Powers in Achieving Sustainable Democracy in Nigeria (The Fourth Republic), see https://www.researchgate.net; Accessed on 8/92025 at 2am

[86] Ibid

[87] Agbakoba, O. (2019). The State of the Judiciary in Nigeria, see https://olisaagbakoba.wordpress.com; Accessed on 8/9/2025 at 2:15am

[88] Ibid

[89] Ibid

[90] Republic of Rwanda. (2019). Judicial Sector Strategic Plan, see https://www.minijust.gov.rw; Accessed on 7/9/2025 at 2:10am

[91] Rwanda Judiciary. (2020). Annual Report, see https://www.judiciary.gov.rw; Accessed on 7/9/2025 at 12:47am

[92] Ibid

[93] Ibid

[94] Ibid

[95] Sunday Jackson v The State (2025) LPELR-80692 (SC).

[96] Ibid

[97] Uwaekweghinya v The State (2005) 9 NWLR (Pt. 930) 27 SC.

[98] Rwanda’s Landmark Court Cases of 2023: A Year of Legal Drama and Justice, see https://www.bbc.com; Accessed on 7/9/2025 at 4:03am

[99] Ibid

[100] Rwandan courts resolved over 124,000 cases in the 2024/25 judicial year, see https://ukwelltimes.com; Accessed on 7/9/2025 at 5:05am.

[101] Achievement in Judiciary: 15,000 cases resolved in Rwanda in 2024-2025 without going to court, see https://oldjudiciary.gov.rw; Accessed on 7/9/2025 at 5:45am

[102] Statutory Law, Case Law, and International Treaties: A Comprehensive Guide for Lawyers in Ghana, see https://otugubaassociates.com; Accessed on 7/9/205 at 5:45am

[103] Supreme Court of Ghana Ruling on Unnatural Carnal Knowledge – July 2024, see https://dennislawnews.com; Accessed 7/9/2025 at 8:45am

[104] About the U.S. Courts: Judicial Independence | Federal Judicial Center

[105] Promoting the Independence, Integrity, and Impartiality of the Judiciary

[106] Judicial Reform Proposals: What’s on the Horizon for the U.S. Courts?

[107] Building a More Inclusive Federal Judiciary – Center for American Progress

[108] Analyzing the Independence of the Judiciary of the United Kingdom | Legal Service India – Law Articles – Legal Resources

[109] The Politics of Judicial Independence in the UK’s Changing Constitution

[110] Ibid

[111] Formation Judge Seminar 2: The UK Legal System London, United Kingdom HRODC Postgraduate Training Institute | Emagister

______________________________________________________________________ Explore Nigeria’s Constitutional System — 17 Chapters, 924 Pages Of Insight By Prof. Hagler Sunny Okorie

Call to Order Your Copy: 📞 0803 766 7945 | 0802 863 6615 | 0803 225 3813 ✉️ haglersoco@gmail.com 🏢 Winners Chambers, 135 Ehi Road, Aba, Abia State ______________________________________________________________________ Your Guide To Nigeria’s Competition Law — DOA Handbook (Volumes 1 & 2) Released At ₦20,000

Available for purchase at ₦20,000 Per copy through LawPavilion’s trusted platform. Search for The DOA Handbook on Nigerian Competition Law or use the direct link: Click here. ______________________________________________________________________ “History of Rivers State Judiciary: A Compendium of Personalities on the Bench.” Authored by Ampim Gogo Blankson, Esq., Deputy Director at the Rivers State Ministry of Justice, in collaboration with the Rivers State Judiciary 💰 Cover Price: ₦20,000.00 (Twenty Thousand Naira) Bukky Law Books, Rivers State High Court Complex, Moscow Road, Port Harcourt – 📞 08034868754📞 08034729738📞 Enquiries: ______________________________________________________________________ Alexander Payne Co. Law Reports

Contact & Orders 📞 0704 444 4777 | 0704 444 4999 | 0818 199 9888 🌐 www.alexandernigeria.com

______________________________________________________________________ The books are available for purchase at: Online: www.educodex.com | www.selar.com | www.amazon.com | www.mikeozekhome.com Enquiries: +234 704 044 9375 | +234 814 813 4773 | +234 816 872 3532 Email: educodexl@gmail.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 ______________________________________________________________________