Wanted in Nigeria: Open justice system, by Tonnie Iredia,
The Southwest of Nigeria leads in several aspects of life in the country today because its pioneering leader, Obafemi Awolowo had before independence in 1960, created for his people, a reformative self-awareness governance system. As premier of the then Western Region, Awolowo introduced free education for all in addition to a combined radio and television service which helped to inculcate philosophy and logic in the citizens. One of the advantages of the ethos was that it propelled human capital development beyond every other type of infrastructural improvements. Till today, there are still parts of Nigeria where citizens are yet to comprehend the basic fact that government is accountable to the people just as public facilities belong not to the government but to the people.
It is the absence of the reformative self-awareness system in some parts of Nigeria, that explains why many citizens in such areas hardly see any difference between yesterday and today. What appears to matter is continued existence, its nature and character don’t really matter. For example, in search of electoral reforms, our legislators recently voted massively for a design that retains the same mischief that had over the years thwarted the votes of the people. A few legislators later explained that they supported the old order because many villages were yet to have signals that would have made them to reject the problematic analogue design. How do the legislators send money to their families in the same villages?
The point to be made is that in Nigeria, nothing really changes. What perhaps many do not know is that those who are hearing of an event for the first time have a way of ignorantly making it look as if the same event could not have happened or has never happened before. In reality however, bizarre things are common in our clime. Only last week, a federal high court judge in Abuja, Justice Mohammed Umar reportedly asked a lawyer, Marshall Abubakar in an open court to come out and kneel down for allegedly disturbing the court process. Some analysts including the Nigerian Bar Association NBA were said to have expressed concerns over the order. But there was nothing new about the order because it was not the first time a judge would resemble a bullying college prefect.
In December 2021, a Warri-based lawyer, Andrew Obido had gone to the Court Registry to file a document when his conversations with the registrars resonated in the court of a judge of the Federal High Court Warri, Justice Okon Abang. The latter according to media reports promptly ordered the lawyer “to stand and face the wall for making noise in the court registry.” This report establishes that the act of judges humiliating lawyers in court is neither new nor uncommon. As in the Abuja case of last week, the Nigerian Bar Association also promptly criticised the behaviour of judges who cherish humiliating lawyers in public. But no one knows how the complaints of the NBA on the indecent treatment of lawyers in some courts are usually handled.
All that the public gets to hear is that the NBA usually condemns the humiliation of lawyers by judges but whether or not the association actually implements its resolution to report the matter to the National Judicial Council NJC cannot be ascertained – leading to a few questions. What has been the reaction of the NJC to such reports? Could it be that on investigation, the NJC found a totally unacceptable conduct by the concerned lawyers? These questions are perhaps not as significant as the true state of contempt of court in Nigeria and indeed in many climes. As a law student, one understood clearly that to be held liable for contempt of court, a person does not necessarily have to be a party to a proceeding before a court. Any person whatsoever can be held liable for contempt if such a person does any act which may hinder the course of justice or show disrespect to the court’s authority.
It is a bit easy for people to be found guilty of contempt of court because contempt could be direct or indirect. Direct contempt refers to contempt in the face of the court while indirect contempt talks about contempt committed outside the court. As a law teacher, contempt of court is getting increasingly more difficult to explain going by the popularity of media trials which often feature some publicity conscious lawyers publicly and freely commenting on matters that are before a court. By so doing, some litigants are projected as guilty before a court hears their case in full. This is perhaps the most irritating and common infraction in recent years which the academia never imagined would ever happen.
But then, change is a necessity of life. With the attribution of the massive development in the western world to technology, there is now a growing belief even in developing societies that technology is now the key governing force in society and the redeeming feature of humanity. It is therefore retrogressive to shy away from the coverage of court proceedings especially LIVE broadcasts which can best narrate, reflect and convey how a case was honestly handled. In truth, judges must find easier ways to reduce their phobia for the media. In a country like Nigeria where the highest law of the land empowers the media to hold government accountable to the people, the judiciary must remember at all times that it is an arm of government whose powers are donated by the people and must thus be answerable to the people through the process of what is known as open justice.
As a principle, open justice bestows openness and transparency on the legal process. The principle which had its roots in Britain and some commonwealth countries is fast gaining global popularity. South Africa is a good example of a country that has fully embraced it with admirable innovations and progressive interpretations which are yielding positive fruits. There is no better time than now for Nigeria with conservative politicians and statesmen who have for long slowly adjusted to innovation to see the virtue of open justice – an argument that is enhanced by court decisions which support the point that the workings of the justice system ought not to be shielded away from the public domain. Put differently, the right to public courts ought not to be seen as belonging only to litigants but to the world at large.
As a result, people should be empowered to discuss, endorse, criticize, applaud or castigate the conduct of their courts. It is sufficient to make the point that in the progressive world, the issue of open justice has become a settled phenomenon. It is agreed that because courts exercise public power over citizens, their proceedings ought to be open so as to encourage public understanding as well as accountability. It is not everything that the judiciary should appropriate while settling disputes. For instance, the collation of election results is an electoral function and not a job for the judiciary. It was because it sought to collate election results in certain centres some years ago that the Nigerian judiciary arrived at more votes than voters.
Similarly, media coverage of the settlement of election disputes is not a function of the judiciary. It is for the media to handle. That does not derogate from the power of the judiciary to deal with the substantive issue of the settlement of election petitions. There is no logic in the thinking that the judiciary is best positioned to determine the nature and type of the coverage of critical cases. During the 2023 presidential election petitions, the judicial panel assumed the posture of an emperor and made a mess of public understanding of its pronouncements, diction and even body language. It ruled out the media but at the end attempted to use it to reach the public. The judiciary should learn to collaborate with the media to identify the easiest way for our citizens, the real owners of political power to be part of the process of settlement of election disputes.
If Nigeria decides to follow global realities, her people’s self-awareness principle would completely eliminate issues like contempt of court. In other words, the law of contempt of court which is occasionally subjected to a judge’s temperament would assume some level of certainty. Considering that the powers of judges in a democracy are delegated to them by the people, there is no need for judges to vindicate their authority or display majesty or pomp over the people. Their authority should come from public confidence, arising from their own integrity, impartiality and simplicity. Our courts should always strive to use the contempt law solely as a shield for protecting the justice delivery system and not as a sword for attacking anyone.
The post Wanted in Nigeria: Open justice system, by Tonnie Iredia appeared first on Vanguard News.
,
The Southwest of Nigeria leads in several aspects of life in the country today because its pioneering leader, Obafemi Awolowo had before independence in 1960, created for his people, a reformative self-awareness governance system. As premier of the then Western Region, Awolowo introduced free education for all in addition to a combined radio and television […]
The post Wanted in Nigeria: Open justice system, by Tonnie Iredia appeared first on Vanguard News.
, , Emmanuel Okogba, {authorlink},, , Vanguard News, March 22, 2026, 12:26 am
