The primary responsibility of every judicial system is to protect the rights and freedom of the people as well as ensure that they have access to justice without compromise. To achieve this, it is important to sustain efforts towards strengthening the independence, impartiality and integrity of the judicial system.
The primary objective of the principles of separation of power in a democratic government is to ensure that the various arms of government operate independently and that persons operating these arms are not the same so as to avoid arbitrariness. This principle aims at protecting inalienable rights of the individuals on one hand and the interest of the society on the other hand.
The concern for justice and existence of an impartial judiciary becomes more important in a country such as Nigeria and other African countries where over greater percentage of the populace have limited level of social consciousness and enlightenment over various activities that affect their lives, which often hinder them from effectively exercising their rights.
A critical look at the socio-political development of Nigeria in recent years raises a lot of questions impartiality of the judiciary. While it is true that the judiciary, over the years, has delivered landmark judgments that clearly served the cause of justice and which were lauded by the citizenry, it is equally true that some verdicts from some courts have left so many people, including some legal luminaries, scratching their heads, confused, puzzled and perplexed.
Over the years, conflicting judgments and orders from courts of concurrent jurisdiction has remained a serious challenge to the country’s judicial system, where litigants receive conflicting and bewildering verdicts that leave them at the mercy of superior court. Just recently, Jigawa High court issued an order on political issue in Anambra state without having jurisdiction. Contradictions in the judicial process often give negative perception of the judiciary and frustrate litigants in their quest for justice.
Again, today correctional centres and police cells are overcrowded with people awaiting trial for various offences. Some of them have become hopeless with frustration, not because they are guilty but because they cannot prove their innocence without standing trial in a law court, while others have died in detention without being convicted of any offence.
This situation becomes lamentable when viewed, from the perception of the basic principles of law which holds a suspect innocent until proved otherwise by law court.
Similarly, the length of time it takes to dispose some cases has become a source of discouragement to many people who are aggrieved to seek redress in court. No doubt, justice delayed is justice denied. Some callous people are exploiting these apparent lapses to deprive others of their fundamental right.
It is important to stress that allegation of corruption in the justice system, whether real or imagined, is a serious threat to confidence in the rule of law.
In a democratic society, law should not be seen as an instrument of cohesion by the ruling class, which controls the power structure, as law does not respect status or class. It is equally important to understand that stable political future will only be guaranteed if the judicial institutions are allowed to carry out their duties without interference.
Legal practitioners should be reminded that the judiciary remains the last hope of the common man. They should see their professions more as a vocation where the protection of the right of an individual should be placed above and beyond every other consideration. They should strive towards promoting peer learning and support activities that will enhance judicial conduct and prevention of corruption in the justice system as well as facilitate international standard on judicial integrity.
Comments are closed for this post.