WHEN JUSTICE IS DELAYED
There is urgent need to address Nigeria’s slow and sleepy justice system
To address the issue of delay in justice administration in Nigeria, the House of Representatives recently mandated its Committee on Constitutional Review to seek practical solutions. The Benjamin Kalu-led committee was tasked with consulting experts, civil society, and citizens to gather inputs for meaningful reforms with a December 2025 deadline. The resolution followed the adoption of a motion titled, “The need to review Nigeria’s justice and judicial system to restore public trust in the judiciary and address the delay in providing justice,” sponsored by Ganiyu Ayuba.
Even before the House committee commences its assignment, it is already clear that the trouble with the Nigerian judiciary can be located in the entire structure, starting from the court gatemen to bailiffs to clerks to registrars down to messengers and typists—officials who equally play very important roles in the dispensation of justice. Oftentimes, these judicial personnel are responsible for the delay of cases in our courts. For instance, when bailiffs refuse to serve court processes simply because they could not extort money from the litigants/counsels, there is bound to be a delay. That explains why in many courts, there are several instances when litigants would
get to court only to learn that their case files have either been misplaced or lost.
Unfortunately, judicial personnel such as bailiffs and court registrars who play key roles in the administration of justice are often excluded from discussions involving the judiciary in the country. But beyond that, we also support the idea of the alternative dispute resolution mechanism being practiced in some states. Many Nigerians are hardly involved in interminable litigations in the “regular” courts which are patronised in urban centres. In most rural communities in the country, disputes are largely resolved through mediation and arbitration. The traditional judicial mechanism has worked effectively from time immemorial. It is currently being adopted by some state governments through the introduction of the imported multi-door system and mediation centres.
Perhaps the most vexatious is that sitting judges are appointed as members of election
petitions tribunals and commissions of enquiry while other cases in their courts are adjourned for several months. The President of the Court of Appeal, Monica Dongban-Mensem, spoke to this issue last year while lamenting that lawsuits emanating from elections in the country is preventing judges from dealing with other cases, including those bordering on the economy. “It is a matter of concern that a large number of judges of the trial court have been engaged for six months in the exclusive management of electoral cases,” Dongban-Mensem said. “The implication is that commercial matters are tied down in our courts. Industrial disputes and land matters which when determined in good time could create jobs and release cash flow into the economy are tied down in court registries.”
Meanwhile, the rules of procedure of each of the courts have placed undue emphasis on technicalities which are invariably exploited to delay hearing of cases. Cases which have been determined by arbitral tribunals constituted by eminent jurists are further subjected to the jurisdiction of regular courts. In some instances, cases which commence at the customary/area courts and magistrate courts are also pursued up to the Supreme Courts by aggrieved parties. In some jurisdictions, judges work in conditions that are not conducive to the speedy determination of cases. Owing to lack of accommodation, judges are compelled to share court rooms. As law libraries are ill-equipped, lawyers are requested by judges to submit photocopies of legal authorities cited by them in their submissions.
These are some of the problems that have to be addressed by critical stakeholders. Painting high court buildings or computerising the court rooms are no solutions to the challenge of justice administration in Nigeria.
