Written by For once in post-independent Nigeria, the Federal Government has come clean on the issue of corruption in the country’s Judiciary.
A Parliamentary Committee recently submitted a secret report to the Presidency. The report, which has been given prominence in a Nigerian newspaper, chronicles a catalogue of unethical practices within the judiciary.
Many Judges are said to be “living above their legal means”. Many of them are also accused of “Judgment procurement”.
This is a term which indicates that a solicitor or barrister settles his client’s claim without the knowledge of the client. The settlement figure is then split, with the Judge taking as much as 60 %; 30% going to the lawyer, leaving the Plaintiff with 10%.
Between 2006 and 2011, “Judgment procurement” netted Nigerian Judges a staggering sum of N106 billion naira.
In consequence, many of the Judges identified in the report have purchased luxury properties in London, South Africa, Dubai and United Arab Emirate.
Properties are said to have been purchased in bogus names, in the names of companies that do not exist. Also, they manufacture names of spouses and children who do not exist.
Some of the Judicial Officers are supporting children in expensive schools in London, New York, Paris, and Switzerland without taking any loans.
Compilers of the secret report maintain that the “emoluments of the judicial personnel involved in the corruption cannot in any way cover the huge sums of money involved in purchasing luxury homes and sending their children to posh schools”.
Other instances of unethical practices cited include “undue influences” on judges, presumably by fellow judges.
Anatomy of judgment
The Presidency vows to punish the culprits, upon the ground that the corruption dates back to the days of Obasanjo and Atiku.
Surprisingly government sources turn their attention to the quality of justice in Nigeria, with particular reference to the issue of anatomy of Judgment.
According to government sources, in the years gone by, following the departure of the colonial masters, judgments emanating from the courts in Nigeria were well regarded, but “today, judgments of the Nigerian courts are not worth the paper they are written on”
Lord Denning remembered
In “The Family Story” by Lord Denning (Late), he wrote:
“Judges do not speak, as do actors, to please. They do not speak as do advocates, to persuade. They do not speak, as do historians, to recount the past. They speak to give judgment. And in their judgment you will find passages which are worthy to rank with the greatest literature which England holds”
Nigerian judges could not possibly fit themselves into Denning’s frame. Judgment after judgment reads like SS3 composition. It is that bad.
Thorn in the throat of Nigerian Judiciary
Presiding Justices often feel uncomfortable where a litigant wants to go it alone. Unlike in the United Kingdom, where McKenzie Friend is a feature of legal representation.
In Nigeria, Judges are well known to hassle, harass, insult and bamboozle litigants in person with spurious science until such persons give up.
One of the key reasons why Nigerian Judges frown at the very thought of a litigant-in-person doing his own case is simply that, a litigant in person cannot do what Nigerians call “mago-mago” (underhand dealings on behalf of His Lordship”), whereas “mago-mago” is a way of life for many legal practitioners in Nigeria.