Misconceiving Judicial Remuneration Review

The Judiciary Can Do No Right 

‘Olawale you are such a disappointment! 800%! What have those Judges done to deserve such an increase?’ Those were the words of a very senior brother silk, when I met him at an event last week. ‘If the salaries are that bad, why are hundreds applying for the job or better still, why don’t they resign enmasse?’. Nigerians will not accept any such increase, especially after the Peter Obi Judgement’. A stream of expletives followed, including words unbecoming of a legal practitioner. He was visibly agitated. He was sweating profusely, even with the air-conditioning. The shouting and the aggressive manner in which he kept pointing his fingers at me, unsettled me. It was one of those days, that I was thankful for my height. All the same, I thought it was best for me to keep quiet, keep a respectful distance at least, beyond the reach of a possible slap. When at the end of his diatribe, he asked me if I had anything to say, I meekly thanked him for his words, and literarily took to my heels. How could I have told him that the premise for his anger was factually and even commonsensically flawed? His thought process devoid of the attributes of a legal practitioner, and a silk, for that matter.  Or that I actually agreed with the Tribunal and Supreme Court decisions in Peter Obi’s matter, even if I am very aware that following those decisions, the Judiciary can do no right in the eyes of some of our very loud colleagues. I resisted the temptation to tell him that election cycles come and go, but the legal profession will remain forever. That, in all the hullabaloo surrounding election petitions, we owe it a duty to the justice system not to lose our heads, at least for the sake of the legal profession. I am almost certain that saying any of these would have earned me a slap, or worse still, a punch. Since I shared this experience with my friends, I have been the butt of their cruel jokes. I guess the image of my 6 ft plus frame being told off by a person of restricted growth, could evoke laughter. I have no regrets. I have not stopped  congratulating myself for speaking with my legs, especially in recognition of the reality that I am now too old to grow any type of teeth.    

Between Remuneration & Prestige, Honour et al 

It is simply not true that 800% upward review of judicial salaries was proposed, either by the Executive or the Judiciary itself. The confusion may have been occasioned by one online Lawyers news outlet, that has made misinformation and sensationalism its trade mark. Regrettably, several of our colleagues did not bother fact check the story, before declaring war on several Whatsapp platforms. The proposed review is a 300% increase in basic salaries. Secondly, the argument about the number of applicants for the Bench in the face of the poor remuneration, erroneously suggests that remuneration is the primary motivating factor for persons seeking appointments to the Bench. A judicial position is in and of itself an attractive career move, regardless of the remuneration package. It is of course most likely the case that applicants are attracted to the position for prestige, honour, a commitment to public service, or for multiple other reasons unrelated to remuneration. It would not be too far-fetched to imagine that for some applicants who have nonetheless applied for the position over the years, especially those from private practice, the judicial remuneration package is probably a pay cut compared to their previous earnings.

Fair Remuneration as a Human Right

It is bewildering that the anti-upward review advocates, find nothing slightly unsettling with the fact that judicial officers in Nigeria have been on the same salary structure for 17 years. The suggestion that Nigerians will not accept such upward review, is by itself ridiculous and mean. I am not sure how Nigerians were polled by proponents of this argument. In any case, governance is not a popularity contest. Nigerians should be told that, there is now a compelling need to increase judicial salaries. That it must be set at a comparatively high public-service level, in order to remove both the temptation to corruption and public contemplation of the possibility of such temptation. It is also amusing that some of our colleagues are too angry to realise that, the evaluation of judicial remuneration should proceed primarily from the basis that fair remuneration is first and foremost a basic human right. Judicial officers deserve to have their rights and job security, respected.

Complaints Against Our Judicial System

The assumption that those of us in the forefront of the advocacy for the review of judicial remuneration are solely concerned about salary increase to the exclusion of everything else, is a false one. Nothing could be further from the truth. Speaking for myself, I am certainly not satisfied with the state of our judicial system. Like any other practitioner, I worry about the glaring deficiencies in the system, and the implications for our justice system. My list of complaints, is long. To mention a few, I am concerned about the limited use of technology in our courts. I am unable to see why we are yet to make progress with virtual proceedings, especially for non-contentious matters or for even for the purpose of adopting briefs. I worry about case management system, in the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. More in the Supreme Court. The inability of the Judiciary to take control of the flow of cases to the Supreme Court, baffles me. The uncertainty and prolonged hearing dates even for life and limb matters, is a major source of concern. I worry about discipline on the Bench, the impunity of conflicting judgements and its effects on the image of the judicial system. I am increasingly alarmed at the quality of persons appointed to the Bench, and the emerging perception that merit is no longer a requirement. In all, I fear that we are too conservative to realise that if we do not take our judicial system on a different direction, one which enables citizens’ confidence, we may yet self-destruct. 

I agree that our judicial system needs change, change in a way that has never been seen in the history of Nigeria. A radical shift from where we are, to where we all know we should be. I am however, certain that this change will not happen by insulting the Judiciary and calling out judicial officers on social media platforms, more often than not with unsubstantiated allegations. It is very easy to write abusive Whatsapp and X messages, or grant social media interviews. The difficult part is rolling up our sleeves, which thankfully an increasing number of us are now doing, and getting down to the thankless job of judicial reform advocacy.

The Judicial Office Holders (Salaries & Allowances, etc) Bill, 2024

The Bill before the National Assembly, is the Judicial Office Holders (Salaries and Allowances, etc) Bill, 2024. The Bill is a product of a consultative and inclusive process led by the Honourable Attorney- General of the Federation, but, included the National Judicial Council, Revenue Mobilisation, Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) and the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA). Aside from the said upward review of the basic salaries of judicial officers across board, the Bill provides for a number of novel allowances that recognise the unique situation of judicial officers. Restrictive Lifestyle Allowance, Dual Responsibility Allowance for heads of courts, Professional Development Allowance, are some of the newly introduced benefits. While the Bill is an important leap forward from the current situation of judicial officers, it suffers from certain limitations which should hopefully be addressed in the course of parliamentary scrutiny. The most obvious, is the lack of distinction between newly appointed and serving judicial officers. A newly appointed Judge  earns the same salary, as one that has spent a decade or more on the Bench. The second notable issue is the lack of certainty, with respect to retired judicial officers. By the strict reading of the Bill, they are not beneficiaries of the review. In my view, the most important limitation of the Bill is the dependence on the President of the Federation and RMAFC, for future reviews of judicial salaries and  allowance. It would seem that the mischief of judicial dependency on the executive, has come to stay. This is a major stumbling block, towards achieving judicial independence. Yakubu Maikyau SAN the NBA President, put the issue succinctly when he said in his statement to the Senate Public Hearing that ‘our respectful position is that the review of judicial remuneration, should not be left to the untrammelled discretion of the very arm of government on which they should not be dependent.’ The NBA Advocacy Briefing Note on Judicial Remuneration proposes a Judicial Office Holders Entitlements Panel to replace the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission as it relates to the review of Judicial remuneration, as the need arises.

Final Word

It is now left for the National Assembly and President Bola Tinubu to do the needful, and ensure prompt enactment of the legislation. 17 years is by any reasoning, too long a period for any worker, not in the least judicial officers, to be subjected to a wage freeze. It is time to turn that page and focus on other pressing issues within the judicial system, like judicial accountability.