Of late, there have been renewed agitation from diverse sectors of the Nigerian society for the bifurcation of the office of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation. The call for separation is premised on the perceived influence that the executive arm of government bears on the Attorney General/Minister of Justice.

Many have submitted that the Attorney General as the Minister of Justice does the bidding of the executive at the expense of the citizenry and have, since Nigeria’s attainment of independence, always taken sides with the government against its citizens. The occupier of the office is seen as the Chief Law Officer of the Federal Government as against his true office as the Chief Law Officer of the Federation. The renewed call for its separation was noted by the Senate, who in their consultation on the amendment of specific sections of the 1999 Constitution, have called for an alteration of Section 150.

Section 150(1) of the 1999 Constitution provides that: There shall be an Attorney General of the federation who shall be the Chief Law Officer of the federation and a Minister of the Government of the federation.

The exact wordings of Section 150(1) of the 1999 Constitution leaves no in doubt that whosoever is appointed under the Section would occupy two offices – he would serve as the Attorney General as well as the Minister of Justice.  As a minister in the government of the federation, he would be a member of the cabinet and consequently head a ministry, in this instance, the Ministry of Justice. In his capacity as the Attorney General of the Federation, he would represent the government in all actions against the state.

True justice can only be achieved if both offices are combined. Strictly speaking, the argument for bifurcation is without merit. While there is no doubt that the Ministry of Justice, being one of the ministries of the government does the bidding of the government, the role of the prospective Attorney General after amendment has yet to be determined.

Since 1243 when the office of the Attorney General was created in England, occupiers of the office have done the bidding of the government and represented her in actions against it. From the United State of America – which practises the closest ideals of federalism cum democracy; to the United Kingdom – from whom we borrowed our ideals and form of government;  to the Republic of India – the world largest democratic and federalist state – the office of the Attorney General has been that of the representative of the government for and on behalf of the citizens.

The error in the attempts by the legislature, which has received backing from some of the prominent legal luminaries of our generation, is premised on the mistaken role of the Attorney General.

In an ideal society, the Attorney General represents the government for and on behalf of the citizens. By implication, the office of the Attorney General is an office that represents the citizens at large using the instrument of the state. Little wonder that in criminal cases, the prosecutor is not the victim himself but the state he is acting for.

Further also is the insurmountable hurdle of how the Attorney General is to be appointed. Is he to be appointed by the government, the populace via popular election or by the Nigerian Bar Association?

If the Attorney General were to be appointed by the President, he is likely to suffer from the same likelihood of bias and deference to the executive arm of government that the present occupier is accused of. The idea of the Chief Law Officer, being popularly elected, strips the exalted office from its impartial stance in the muddled waters of politics. Leaving the occupier of the exalted office to be appointed or elected by the Nigerian Bar Association violates the concepts of popular representation.

The duplication of the office might also result in jurisdictional questions stalling up cases at the court seeking interpretations of whom between the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General of the Federation is the proper party to either institute an action or carry out one function or the other. The consequential duplication of functions which is likely to be the aftermath of its division leaves much to be desired.

While the reservation of the `separation` bloc is not unfounded, the way out of the tunnel is not in the division of the office but in the officer occupying the office himself. He should remember that although he is a member of the executive arm of government appointed by the President, he is to serve as an independent umpire, balancing the welfare of the citizens against that of the State. He should thus not be scared to tilt the scale of justice to the side where a balance is found wanting. He should be a fearless minister in the temple of justice whose blindfold must not be used to perpetrate injustice. He should also not be afraid to resign his office if he believes that the state wants him to take a stance or implement a policy that runs contrary to the principle of the `benefit of the highest number`.

In the face of the plethora of bottlenecks seeking resolution, it seems little minded that our National Assembly should further throw the country into a jurisprudential hullabaloo on the merit or otherwise of the separation of the offices. Issues like true federalism, security revamping, of the economy, advancement of information technology, our educational system, fundamental human rights, unemployment, radicalism, religious extremism deserve to be at the forefront of our constitutional discuss. The agitation for the separation of the office of the Minister of Justice from that of the Attorney General is of no moment. Whether this would remain is left to the jury when they return from their deliberations.

  • Ajaja, a legal practitioner, writes from Lagos
"Exciting news! TheNigeriaLawyer is now on WhatsApp Channels 🚀 Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest legal insights!" Click here! ....................................................................................................................... Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material and other digital content on this website, in whole or in part, without express and written permission from TheNigeriaLawyer, is strictly prohibited _________________________________________________________________ [Register Now] ILA Nigeria Branch Marks 10 Years With Infrastructure Financing As Theme For 7th Annual Conference The International Law Association - Nigeria Branch 7th annual conference on public-private partnerships for sustainable infrastructure financing, April 4-5 in Abuja. Details: https://ilanigeria.org.ng/conference _________________________________________________________________

NIALS' Compendia Series: Your One-Stop Solution For Navigating Nigerian Laws (2004-2023)

Email: info@nials.edu.ng, tugomak@yahoo.co.uk, Contact: For Inquiry and information, kindly contact, NIALS Director of Marketing: +2348074128732, +2348100363602.