The article outlines the historical evolution of Nigeria’s Supreme Court, detailing challenges arising from political influence and recent calls for reforms. Sir John Verity’s foresight warned against decentralizing the judiciary, which ultimately occurred, leading to an overburdened court primarily engaged in electoral disputes. A recent proposal to create regional divisions is critiqued as misguided, failing to address the root causes of the court’s current inefficiencies.
In 1954, Sir John Verity lost his position as Chief Justice of colonial Nigeria after opposing proposals to decentralize the judiciary during a constitutional conference. He accurately predicted that regional judges could be manipulated by politicians, undermining judicial independence. As a result, he retired early, witnessing the establishment of the Federal Supreme Court (FSC), which became the highest court, replacing the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London.
By 1963, nationalists who had fought for independence had transformed into political leaders aiming to control the judiciary, mirroring their colonial predecessors. The ruling coalition abolished the Privy Council’s authority, solidifying the Supreme Court as Nigeria’s apex court. Amidst growing complexity in Nigeria’s political economy, the Supreme Court’s workload expanded without any substantive reforms to manage its increasing docket.
Since the return to democracy in 1999, the Supreme Court has focused primarily on electoral disputes, undermining its credibility and creating a backlog of unresolved appeals. This situation, along with other pressures, has prompted a renewed call for reform in how the court operates. A recent proposal by Manu Soro seeks to establish five regional divisions of the Supreme Court to enhance access and expediency.
While this proposal aims to address accessibility issues, it fundamentally misunderstands the core mission of the Supreme Court and fails to diagnose the underlying problems affecting judicial efficiency. The suggested regional divisions could dilute the court’s authority, transforming it into a collection of fragmented jurisdictions rather than maintaining its role as an apex institution. Evidence suggests that real reform must focus on enhancing case management and constraining entry to appeals significantly.
Instead of creating regional divisions, the more critical need is to professionalize the administration of the court and manage cases more efficiently. The issues currently plaguing the Supreme Court reflect a complicated interplay of political and judicial dynamics that must be understood and addressed holistically. Therefore, moving to create judicial divisions could worsen the existing crisis.
The piece discusses the historical and contemporary challenges facing Nigeria’s Supreme Court, emphasizing the dangers of political influence and the need for judicial reform. It traces the evolution of the court from colonial times to its current structure, highlighting key decisions and events that shaped its operation. The focus on electoral disputes has contributed to a backlog of cases and diminished the court’s credibility. The new proposal for regional divisions, while well-intended, misdiagnoses the issues at hand and risks further fragmentation of judicial authority.
In summary, the Supreme Court of Nigeria faces significant challenges due to its focus on political disputes, leading to a backlog and lack of credibility. Proposed reforms to create regional divisions may distract from the core issues that need addressing, such as case management and judicial independence. A more robust approach is necessary to tackle the existing crisis effectively and maintain the court’s status as the apex judicial authority in Nigeria.
Original Source: www.premiumtimesng.com
