Not All Robes Are Stained: Rethinking The Corruption Narrative Against Nigerian Judges

By Adedayo Adedeji, SAN

INTRODUCTION

1. The judiciary in any democratic society plays a crucial role in safeguarding the rule of law, ensuring accountability, and maintaining societal equilibrium. In recent years, however, the Nigerian judiciary has come under increasing scrutiny, with public discourse often painting a picture of a judiciary mired in corruption with a single brush. While it would be hypocritical to deny that some judicial officers have acted below the ethical standards of their office, it is equally unjust to cast a blanket indictment on the entire institution, particularly when examples of model members of the bench abound at every level of the judiciary.
2. The Nigerian judiciary faces the challenge of having the actions of a smaller number of errant individuals overshadow the exemplary work of many diligent and dedicated judicial officers. This article argues that the dominant corruption narrative is mostly exaggerated, often ill – informed, and fails to account for the silent majority of judicial officers who serve with honour, discipline, and stark commitment to justice.

THE RISK OF OVERGENERALISATION

3. The danger of overgeneralisation in accusing the judiciary of endemic corruption lies in the potential erosion of public confidence in a vital democratic institution. When society begins to view all judges through the lens of suspicion, the rule of law is jeopardized. The truth, however, is that there are more incorruptible Judex in the Nigerian judiciary than there are corruptible ones. In most situations, those who generalise their criticism of the judiciary do so without empirical facts and often rely more on hearsay. Such generalisations may also undermine judicial independence by creating a perception that judges are corrupt regardless of individual conduct. It is more troubling if lawyers and other players in the justice administration make baseless allegations of corruption and compromise against the judiciary just because certain decisions did not appeal to their personal preference and prejudice.
4. Beyond undermining institutional trust, the overgeneralised narrative of judicial corruption poses serious economic risks. A judiciary perceived as uniformly corrupt discourages both foreign direct investment and domestic enterprise. The truth is that investors depend on the predictability, impartiality, and efficiency of the courts to enforce contracts and resolve commercial disputes. If the judiciary is broadly painted as compromised, capital inflows reduce, startups hesitate to expand, and international businesses seek jurisdictions with more perceived legal certainty. In addition, it can create a chaotic society where people opt for self-help on the flawed assumption that the judiciary is generally corrupt and unable to do justice in their case.
5. Around the world, the judiciary is not just a dispute resolution body; it is a driver of economic stability and national development. In the United States, for example, the independence and integrity of the federal judiciary protects the confidence of investors and corporations who pour billions into regulated industries, confident in their legal protections. Singapore’s rise as a financial hub was significantly driven by the global respect for its incorruptible and efficient judiciary. Similarly, the United Kingdom continues to attract international commercial litigation to its courts because of their perceived fairness and reliability. According to the CityUK Legal Services Report (2025) the Commercial Court in London, attracts complex international disputes because of the confidence litigants have in its impartiality and depth of legal reasoning. It is estimated that the legal services sector contributes over £60 billion annually to the UK economy, a significant portion of which is derived from international litigation and arbitration hosted in the UK. These examples underscore the point that a strong and trusted judiciary is an economic asset. Nigeria’s judiciary has the potential to serve the same catalytic function, but only if it is protected from baseless assaults that tarnish its institutional image. The legal profession, media, and civil society must acknowledge that corruption allegations should be routed through the proper channels, such as the National Judicial Council, rather than broadcast as media innuendo or personal frustration. We must not forget that the judiciary is not only the last hope of the common man; it is the only hope of Government and concepts such as the Rule of law. Modern democratic society as we know it today will cease where confidence is lost in the judiciary.  Therefore, it is in the interest of all that we desist from generalising this concept of corruption in the judiciary. The risk is huge and devastating and I am sure majority of Nigerians do not want to go back to those days of autocracy and dictatorship.

INTERNAL ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS

6. The judiciary has not been silent in the face of corruption allegations. The office of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), currently occupied by Justice Kudirat Motomori Kekere – Ekun, has taken definitive steps to uphold judicial discipline and integrity. In recent times, the NJC, under my Lord’s leadership, has imposed various disciplinary measures on erring judges. These have included suspension from office, recommendations for compulsory retirement, and restrictions on elevation to higher courts. These actions underscore the judiciary’s commitment to internal cleansing and its refusal to shield those who compromise judicial ethics by successive administrations. Rather than being unduly vilified the Judiciary should be commended for upholding the rule of law and our democratic institution. The NJC should also be commended for the recent guidelines and procedural rules for appointment (2025) of judicial officers to all superior courts requiring invitation from members of the public, legal practitioners, and other stakeholders to submit written observations, on the integrity, competence, or impartiality of shortlisted candidates. This mechanism provides timely and constructive avenue to raise concerns before appointments are finalized.
7. Furthermore, it is universally acknowledged that judicial officers must conform to legal and ethical standards. A judiciary of high integrity is the foundation for building and maintenance of public confidence in the judiciary. Judicial officer’s ought to be standard bearers in both their professional and private lives. The ability of courts to fulfill their mission and perform their functions is based on the public’s trust and confidence in the judiciary. This trust is earned through the faithful performance of duties, adherence to ethical standards, and effective internal oversight, review, and governance. These responsibilities include accountability for a failure to observe scrupulous adherence to ethical codes. The surest way to lose trust and confidence is failure to live up to established ethical standards and failure to hold judges and judicial personnel accountable for misconduct. Transparency in efforts to ensure accountability for misconduct, where possible and appropriate, helps foster public trust and confidence.

WEAPONISING THE MEDIA AGAINST THE JUDEX

8. The rise of disgruntled litigants and lawyers arbitrarily using the media has become an unfortunate trend in recent times. Litigant and lawyers who lose cases often turn to the press to accuse the presiding judges of bias or corruption, thereby undermining judicial independence and tarnishing the integrity of the bench. Rather than explore the appropriate channels provided by law for appeal or review, such individuals resort to public castigation, creating a hostile environment for judges to function.
9. This practice not only damages the personal reputations of innocent judicial officers but also chips away at the institutional credibility of the judiciary. It perpetuates a toxic perception among the general populace, especially those with limited knowledge of how legal proceedings work, that justice is invariably bought and sold.
10. While the Constitution guarantees freedom of expression, especially in our current democratic environment, it should also be noted that this Constitutional right must be exercised within the bounds of the law. As the saying goes, “where one person’s right end, another’s right begin”. We may have reached a point where individuals who take pleasure in every little provocation feel compelled to rush to the media to insult and undermine the judiciary. The actions of some colleagues in promoting petitions and publishing articles to protest alleged misconduct of high judicial officers – clearly aimed at obstructing the judicial process and creating an appearance of bias – should be condemned. Such behavior constitutes unwarranted interference in the judicial process, serving personal agendas that often align with the interests of their clients.

PROTECTING THE JUDICIARY AS AN INSTITUTION

11. The judiciary is not infallible. It has never presented itself as such, but it is indispensable. For this reason, every effort must be made to safeguard its sanctity. This is especially important in a country like Nigeria, where democratic institutions are still evolving and vulnerable to external interference. Lawyers, who are officers of the court, have a professional duty to protect the integrity of the judiciary. This responsibility includes refraining from making unsubstantiated allegations that could harm the institution and mislead the public. The growing trend of lawyers and litigants publicly analyzing pending cases in the media in a manner that prejudges them has become increasingly irritating. It may be time to hold lawyers accountable for engaging in unsubstantiated attacks against the judiciary. Both lawyers and judges are products of the same institution, and it is concerning that a few individuals derive pleasure from undermining the entire system. They seem to forget that it is this very profession that has granted them a platform to voice their opinions. Rather than indulge in populist attacks, the legal community should champion reforms, support transparency, and hold the judiciary accountable through appropriate channels. Afterall, what we were taught as lawyers is that the appropriate avenue to express constructive criticism of judgment of Court are in journals. Constructive criticism, anchored in evidence and routed through institutional mechanisms, is the way forward, not trial by media or mass rhetoric.
12. The impartiality of the judiciary is not merely a procedural requirement; it is the very essence of justice. Judges are not parties to the dispute; they are neutral arbiters whose credibility rests on their detachment from the dispute.

CONCLUSION

13. The popular assertion that “not all robes are stained” is more than a rhetorical defence of the judiciary, it is a principled call for discernment, fairness, and institutional preservation. While it is undeniable that some members of the bench have fallen short of the high ethical standards expected of them, it is intellectually and morally unsound to equate the failings of a few with the character of the entire institution and paint it with the brush of indictment. The judiciary, despite its imperfections, remains a cornerstone of democratic governance and the final fortress for the protection of rights, enforcement of the rule of law, and resolution of societal disputes.
14. The fight against judicial corruption must continue with vigour and integrity. However, such efforts must be pursued with a clear understanding that individual misconduct should not be misconstrued with institutional failure. The credibility of the judiciary hinges not only on its ability to sanction errant officers but also on society’s willingness to acknowledge and support those who discharge their duties with honour and self-restraint.
15. A shift in public discourse is urgently needed, from one of sweeping condemnation to one of balanced evaluation. Judges who uphold their oath of office, often under challenging circumstances, deserve not just our protection but our commendation. Their commitment to justice should not be drowned out by the noise of distrust or the frustration of a few who may have lost cases on merit. This is not just a moral defence, it is an economic and professional imperative.

______________________________________________________________________

Evidence And Trial Proceedings, Pleadings And Damages, Civil Appeals — All In Civil Litigation Serial Volumes 4–6!

4. Evidence and Proceedings at Trial in Civil Litigation — Governing Principles 5. Pleadings, Reliefs and Measures of Damages — with Precedents 6. Civil Appeal at Court of Appeal and Supreme Court — with Precedents "Civil Litigation Serial is designed to be an indispensable reference for lawyers engaged in civil litigation practice," said Basil Momodu Esq., the author of the series. Call 07051822705 to get your copies today! ______________________________________________________________________ "Democracy Or Demoncrazy?", "Good Governance" And "Politics And Political Class": Order Prof. Ozekhome's Essential Trilogy Now 📞 Enquiries: +234 704 044 9375 | +234 814 813 4773 | +234 816 872 3532 📧 Email: educodexl@gmail.com Follow the voice of wisdom. Read Prof. Mike Ozekhome. Be inspired. Be enlightened. Be empowered. ___________________________________________________________________

Grab Your Complete Law Reports Now!!! IP, Company, Evidence & Land Cases - All Volumes With Digital Index!!!

To get a copy kindly Call 07044444777, 07044444999, 08181999888, https://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 ______________________________________________________________________