Key players in the Nigerian justice system have scored the courts, lawyers and the government low over the prolonged trial of some former state governors, ministers and other Nigerians for acts of corruption several years after they were arraigned in courts.
In some cases, the prosecution of the former elected officials, especially state chief executives by the anti-corruption agencies, have lasted for more than a decade without any hope of deciding their fate in the near future.
In fact, a reasonable number of the accused have died without the cases of alleged corruption brought against them concluded in any law court.
There are also others, whose cases are still pending in court but have been elected into the National Assembly (NASS) or serving as cabinet members in the current administration.
When LEADERSHIP Sunday sought the views of some eminent lawyers and members of civil society organisations (CSOs) on the fight against corruption by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the non-conclusion and conviction of the former governors, they blamed their lacklustre prosecution on judges, lawyers and the government.
A breakdown of the former governors whose cases have not been concluded showed that the North Central Zone has four, North West (4), North East (3), South East (5), South South (4) and South West (3).
Speaking with LEADERSHIP Sunday on the issue, the director of a Lagos-based CSO, Justice and Human Rights Reforms Initiatives (JHRRI), David Babajide, criticised lawyers for significantly contributing to delays in prosecuting criminal cases in court.
Babajide accused some of the country’s senior lawyers of facilitating corruption by undermining the prosecution of corrupt individuals through “orders of interlocutory or perpetual injunctions” that favour those embezzling public funds.
He said that in developed societies, lawyers are obligated to uphold the law above all individuals regardless of their status noting however that in Nigeria, many lawyers have placed wealthy and powerful individuals above the law.
Babagide said, “Several senior lawyers have been manipulating the criminal justice system to the detriment of society. They do this by using their expertise to assist clients in ways that violate legal standards.
“This behaviour contravenes paragraph 15 (2) of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners, which specifies that: In representing a client, a lawyer must adhere strictly to the law, regardless of any contrary instruction from the client. If the client insists on breaking the law, the lawyer must withdraw their services.”
Babajide therefore called on the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) to investigate and discipline ethically-challenged lawyers found to be involved in manipulating the judiciary.
In his reaction, a professor of law, Ernest Ojukwu (SAN), expressed sadness at the failure of the Nigerian criminal justice system to indeed dispense fair and timely justice.
Prof Ojukwu said while the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA or laws for states) was designed to expedite criminal proceedings, its implementation has faced various obstacles.
He identified excessive adjournments, poor investigations, gaps in prosecution, lack of technology and adequate infrastructure, resource constraints, and inadequate training of judicial officers as some of the reasons why criminal cases linger in court.
Prof Ojukwu stressed that for the problems of protracted trials to be solved, there must be rigorous adherence to the provisions of ACJA on trial timelines and a limit on the number of adjournments.
He said, “Courts must introduce or strengthen pre-trial case management conferences to identify issues early, streamline the scope of the trial and set clear timelines.
“We must implement electronic filing systems and digital case records to reduce paperwork. We must ensure law enforcement officials receive ongoing training in investigative techniques, case organisation and evidence management and encourage police and prosecutors to collaborate from the outset, ensuring thorough investigations and well-prepared cases before reaching the courts.
“Recruiting and regularly training more judicial officers and adequately staffing courts can help address chronic backlogs. Judges can be more assertive in holding parties accountable for delays that lack valid justification.”
On his part, human rights lawyer, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa (SAN), said the problem of delay in criminal justice administration is a combination of several factors such as lack of funding of the judiciary “whereby we still have the same number of courts, to handle the upsurge in crimes and criminalities.”
Adegboruwa pointed out the lack of infrastructure and facilities as a significant issue. “For instance, there are situations where the court is ready to proceed with a case, with lawyers prepared and waiting, but no vehicle is available to transport the suspect from prison custody to the courtroom. Additionally, there are times when the suspect is present, but there is no power supply in the courtroom, leading to the adjournment of the case for that reason alone.
“In other cases, the investigating police officer is unavailable due to other official duties or outright transfer away from the trial court’s jurisdiction.
“However, the most prevalent of these factors is the lack of judicial personnel to handle the deluge of cases being heaped upon the courts daily. ACJA cannot cure all these issues.
“The search for effective criminal justice administration should, therefore, be holistic so that we do not achieve success in one area, and then failure in other areas still holds us down.
“Criminal cases should generally be given priority attention, given that the life and liberty of the defendants are involved and the cost to society of the criminal act and its prosecution,” he said.
We’ve got the edge. Get real-time reports, breaking scoops, and exclusive angles delivered straight to your phone. Don’t settle for stale news. Join LEADERSHIP NEWS on WhatsApp for 24/7 updates →
Join Our WhatsApp Channel
