By CHRIS JOHNSON

In Jan, 2019, this court of eminent jurists sat idly by as their head, Chief Justice Walter Onoghen, was hounded out of office like a nonentity by the Buhari administration through an abuse of legal and judicial processes. The body of 12 did not, as one, raise a finger to demand for the protection of Onoghen's basic human rights to dignity, fair hearing and due process - the very pillars of justice Instead, some of its members profited from the removal.

In October, 2019 the Supreme Court, now under Tanko Muhammed, dismissed the appeal of Atiku Abubakar and the PDP against the electoral victory of President Muhammadu Buhari as pronounced by INEC. The court chose to overlook several glaring irregularities in the conduct of the disputed election in favor of the APC as well as obvious cover-ups by INEC, especially concerning the existence or otherwise of a central server. There was neither reprimand nor punishment for the perpetrators of this electoral heist.

In January 2020, the same Supreme Court turned in one of the most curious and heinous verdicts in judicial history. It declared a candidate who came 4th in the Imo State Governorship elections to be the rightful winner of that contest. To date, it remains a mystery how it arrived at this verdict after admitting in evidence the unsubstantiated and unconfirmed "results" from over 300 polling units submitted by the appellant, and ignoring the submissions of the electoral umpire and other parties in the contest. By so doing, the court foisted a vastly unpopular governor on the people of Imo. Blood has not stopped flowing in that state ever since. The governor in question is derisively referred to as the "Supreme Court Governor" by his people and other Nigerians.

More recently in 2023, the Supreme Court has turned in two rulings which appear to most right thinking members of society as subversions of justice. It held that Godswill Akpabio & Mohammed Lawan, who did not contest their party's senatorial primaries in their respective states, were the rightful holders of disputed senatorial tickets. Both men, serving high ranking officials of the Buhari Administration, had contested for the presidential ticket of their party. Having failed in their quests for higher office, both went back to snatch senatorial tickets already contested won by other candidates. The apex court did not find this behavior reprehensible.

By these and some other decisions recently reached, the Supreme Court has slowly but surely descended from its constitutionally assigned Olympian heights. It also laid bad examples which some lower courts have sadly but eagerly followed.

We may not all be lawyers and jurists, but every human society has a fairly accurate sense of right and wrong judgment. Technicalities and legalism cannot obfuscate true justice. When it goes against the grain of common sense, every court must go out if its way to explain and justify its rulings or risk losing respect.

Now, the Supreme Court is asking for its order temporarily halting the Currency Redesign policy to be obeyed by an administration which has routinely procured dubious verdicts from its "hallowed" chambers. Sadly, things don't work that way. Respect is earned on the crucibles of right conduct, sound principles and superior values. It is neither decreed nor prescribed.

The dignity and "infallibility" of the Supreme Court does not rest solely on its constitutional status as Apex Court. It rests, even more importantly, on the manifest wisdom of its judgements and the perceived integrity of the justices.

Individuals and institutions which snub equity or lack moral authority, even if they have a monopoly of force, ultimately lose respect. The Supreme Court is no exception. If it must regain its lost glory, then it must ensure that its decisions are beyond reproach, cannot be procured or swayed by extraneous influence, and that at all times justice is not only done but is seen to have been done.

•Chris Johnson is a Lagos-based public affairs analyst.

Update news