INTRODUCTION

The judiciary in Nigeria is going through very turbulent times and it is very worrisome. In democratic societies, the judiciary serves as the final arbiter of disputes, ensuring that laws are applied fairly and justly. The Nigerian Constitution, which lays the foundation for the country’s legal and political systems, also underscores the crucial role of the judiciary in protecting citizens’ rights and maintaining the rule of law. Section 6(6)(b) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is particularly significant as it asserts the judiciary as “the last hope” of citizens, reinforcing its position as a vital safeguard for the protection of constitutional rights and the delivery of justice. Section 6 of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution deals with the powers and functions of the judiciary. Specifically, subsection (6)(b) states that “the judicial power of the Federation shall not be exercised by any person or authority except the courts of law and, when authorized by law, tribunals.” This provision firmly establishes that judicial power in Nigeria is exclusively vested in the courts and tribunals. It also highlights the critical role of the judiciary in upholding the rule of law, ensuring accountability, and protecting the rights of individuals against potential violations by other branches of government or individuals with undue power.

The Concept of the Judiciary as the “Last Hope”

The phrase “last hope” implies a final safeguard or recourse. In the context of Section 6(6)(b), the judiciary is seen as the ultimate institution to resolve disputes, particularly those relating to individual rights, freedoms, and the proper functioning of government institutions. This provision recognizes the judiciary’s position as a critical pillar in the democratic structure, tasked with providing justice when all other avenues might fail. For Nigerian citizens, the judiciary serves as the last line of defense when the other branches of government — the executive and legislature — fail to protect their rights or act unlawfully. The courts act as an independent body, free from political influence or pressure, to uphold the Constitution and ensure that justice is served, particularly in cases where there are abuses of power or violations of human rights.

The Judiciary’s Role in Protecting Fundamental Rights

One of the most important aspects of the judiciary’s function as the “last hope” is its responsibility to protect fundamental human rights. The Nigerian Constitution guarantees a range of rights for citizens, including the right to life, personal liberty, fair trial, and freedom of expression. However, these rights can often be infringed upon, either by government actions or private parties. In such instances, individuals can turn to the judiciary to seek redress. Courts are empowered to review the constitutionality of actions taken by the executive or legislative branches and declare them unconstitutional if they violate any of the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution. This serves to maintain the balance of power among the various arms of government and prevents the abuse of power.

Judiciary to the Rescue

In March 2020, the Kano State Government announced the deposition and subsequent banishment of Muhammad Sanusi II as the Emir of Kano. It took the brave intervention of the judiciary to save the situation. Very recently, the Supreme Court struck out the criminal case against the former Chief Security Officer to late General Sani Abacha, Major Al-Mustapha (Rtd), for want of diligent prosecution. Though General Sani Abacha himself was never known to have used the courts to seek justice during his lifetime (given his autocratic rule), his family became involved in lengthy legal battles after his sudden death in 1998. Abacha’s family members, particularly his children, resorted to legal actions to reclaim assets and properties that were seized by the Nigerian government or discovered in various international jurisdictions following the collapse of his regime. Abacha’s family sued both in Nigerian courts and abroad, contesting asset seizures and attempting to block the confiscation of wealth accumulated during Abacha’s rule. Many of these cases have continued to unfold over the years, with Nigerian courts being one of the critical venues for these posthumous legal disputes. Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, a former Vice President of Nigeria, has made several legal challenges throughout his political career, particularly in relation to election outcomes. His actions have also highlighted how public officers, even at the highest level, turn to the judiciary to challenge political outcomes they believe to be unjust. In 2015, former President Goodluck Jonathan approached the court for a determination of his eligibility. During his tenure as the governor of Lagos State, Senator Bola Ahmed Tinubu (now President) challenged the power of the federal government of Nigeria to withhold funds meant for the local government councils in Lagos State. Retired judges in Ogun State filed an action in court for the payment of their pensions while the former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Hon Justice Walter Onnoghen fought his sudden removal from office in court. These are few examples of leaders and public officers who have resorted to the judiciary as their last hope. One therefore wonders how while in office, leaders treat the judiciary with disdain, with contempt, neglect and even disobey lawful orders made by the courts. It calls for urgent judicial review.

Judicial Review: A Mechanism of Accountability

Judicial review is one of the core mechanisms through which the judiciary functions as the “last hope” in protecting the rule of law and upholding constitutional principles. It refers to the judiciary’s authority to review and, if necessary, invalidate laws, policies, or actions that are inconsistent with the Constitution. Judicial review, particularly in cases involving unconstitutional legislation or executive actions, is a powerful tool in the hands of the judiciary. In Nigeria, courts regularly engage in judicial review to ensure that laws, executive orders, and administrative actions do not violate constitutional provisions. This is especially vital in safeguarding the rights of citizens and ensuring that governmental actions are conducted within the boundaries of the law.

Ensuring Justice Through the Courts

In a country as diverse and complex as Nigeria, the judiciary’s role as the “last hope” is amplified by the potential for inequality and injustice. The courts serve not only as an adjudicator of disputes but also as an equalizer, ensuring that every citizen, regardless of their status, ethnicity, or background, has access to justice. This is important because without the assurance of fair and impartial adjudication, the fundamental ideals of democracy and justice would be compromised. For instance, in cases of political corruption, human rights violations, or electoral malpractice, the judiciary has often played a key role in holding wrongdoers accountable, irrespective of their political or social status. By providing an independent forum for legal redress, the judiciary ensures that justice prevails and that citizens can rely on the legal system to protect their interests.

Challenges to the Judiciary’s Role as the Last Hope

Despite its critical role, the judiciary in Nigeria faces significant challenges in fulfilling its duties as the “last hope.” These challenges include:

1. Political Interference: The judiciary is often under pressure from the executive and legislative branches, which can compromise its independence. Political interference, especially in high-profile cases, undermines public confidence in the judiciary’s ability to deliver impartial justice.

2. Corruption: Corruption within the judiciary can also hinder its effectiveness. Cases of bribery, favoritism, and other forms of unethical behavior tarnish the integrity of the courts and prevent citizens from obtaining justice.

3. Inadequate Funding and Resources: The Nigerian judiciary often suffers from insufficient funding, outdated infrastructure, and a backlog of cases. These issues impede the ability of the judiciary to deliver timely justice and meet the demands of a growing population.

4. Public Confidence: Public trust in the judiciary can erode when there is a perception of bias, corruption, or inefficiency. Ensuring the independence and impartiality of judges is critical to maintaining faith in the judicial system.

Suggested Solutions

To strengthen the judiciary in Nigeria as the “last hope” for citizens and ensure that it continues to effectively uphold the rule of law, several reforms and strategic solutions are needed. These solutions must address both institutional and systemic challenges, with the goal of enhancing the judiciary’s independence, efficiency, and capacity to deliver justice fairly and impartially. Below are key recommendations to strengthen Nigeria’s judiciary:

Enhance Judicial Independence

To ensure that the judiciary is the true “last hope” of Nigerians, its independence must be safeguarded from political and executive interference. This can be achieved through clear separation of powers among the executive, legislature, and judiciary, ensuring that judges and judicial officers are free from undue influence by political or governmental pressures. Also, it will be necessary to secure the appointment and tenure of judges, by ensuring that the appointment process for judges is transparent and based on merit, rather than political patronage. Additionally, judges should have security of tenure, meaning they cannot be arbitrarily removed from office. There should also be independent judicial fund through the establishment of an independent, constitutionally protected budget for the judiciary, separate from the executive, to prevent financial manipulation and ensure adequate resources for the judiciary’s operations. This should not be a matter of cosmetic legislation without concrete implementation.