TUNDE OYESINA writes that stakeholders in the justice sector have put forward divergent views on the strategy to be adopted in decongesting the apex court of the land
Some stakeholders in the justice sector, including senior lawyers have expressed mixed feelings on how the decentralization of the Supreme Court could help in decongesting the apex court of too many cases.
The arguments were sequel to a Bill seeking to decentralize the Supreme Court currently being considered at the House of Representatives.
The Bill sponsored by Hon. Mansur Manu Soro, representing Darazo/Ganjuwa Federal Constituency, seeks to amend the Constitution to provide for the establishment of five divisions of the Supreme Court of Nigeria for timely dispensation of matters brought before the apex court.
In his arguments, the lawmaker questioned the provisions of Section 230 of the 1999 Constitution that creates only one Supreme Court for the whole country without establishing divisions.
He maintained that it is now time to establish divisions for the Supreme Court in the geo-political zones of the country to enhance access to the highest justice, minimize the logistical cost of accessing justice and ensure timely dispensation of matters brought before the apex court. The Bill has already scaled the first reading at the green chamber.
Proponents of Supreme Court’s decentralization
New Telegraph Law recalls that a retired Justice of the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal, Justice Peter Ige, had during his valedictory session in 2023 called for the decentralization of the Supreme Court for more effective administration of justice.
He said there was nothing wrong if the apex court has divisions in the nation’s six geopolitical zones like the appeal court.
He added that decentralizing the Supreme Court would help to bring justice to the grass-roots. The retired jurist explained that the decentralization of the Supreme Court would reduce its burden and enable it to deliver justice without delays.
In a similar vein, another retired Judge of the Court of Appeal, Justice Mudashiru Oniyangi had also in 2022 called for the decentralization of the Supreme Court to allow for speedy dispensation of justice in the country.
Oniyangi who made this call during a valedictory session to mark his retirement from the Bench, submitted that the nation should consider establishing an appellate court in every state in the country to reduce the volume of pending cases.
He said: “The Supreme Court has a number of cases but my question is why is the Supreme Court not decentralized in every geopolitical zone? The headquarter can be here in Abuja, as well as the Chief Justice of Nigeria.
But, when that division is created, the Justices of the Supreme Court sent there will attend to matters in that geopolitical zone, but it will be the same one Supreme Court, no division.”
“Abuja is full to the brim, cases are pending. The justices are trying, but the number of justices cannot cope with the pressure of jobs going on.”
A Civil Rights Group, Justice and Transparency had also earlier this year called for the decentralization of the apex court. Speaking at a workshop, Executive Director of the Group, Henry Ikebuaku said:
“We require an extreme decentralization of the entire criminal justice framework. This will empower states and surprisingly local communities to operate correctional centers to decrease the degree of dehumanization that inmates experience in our stuffed detention facilities.
“The Supreme Court should be decentralized with the making of Supreme Courts at the six geopolitical zonal headquarters. The Court of Appeal has previously been decentralized, and the states have already been enabled to operate High Courts.
“Establishment of Zonal Supreme Courts to treat specific classes of cases exception of those on fundamental human rights or constitutional rights of Nigerian citizens, is earnestly called for.
Lawyers’ position
In his comments, a rights activist, Onesimus Ruya, maintained that there cannot be more than one Supreme Court in the country because it’s the highest court in the land. Ruya said: “I think they should rather have more justices.
There is no reason why we shouldn’t have up to 100 Supreme Court justices to reduce the workload. The only challenge they have is the workload. There are three courtrooms at the Supreme Court, most times only one is used.
“The mover of the Bill is not looking at the real challenges, they are looking at politics. As we are now, we have courts of appeal in most of the geopolitical zones which will do the same work.
Unless they are saying that those at the appeal court should end there, which gives litigants only one right of appeal which is not fair enough.
“There would still be delays and also confusion or conflicting court decisions. I think what we need to decide and part of the restructuring process is the number of cases that get to the Supreme Court.
There are too many of them that go to the Supreme Court on appeal”. Speaking in the same vein, a senior lawyer, Bright Enado, said decentralizing the Supreme Court will not reduce the delay of cases at the apex court.
“A decentralized Supreme Court could only reduce the number of people going to Abuja for their cases for it would still be the same Supreme Court and the same number of people but now divided among the geopolitical zone.
“We may have more Justices of the Supreme Court but I’m not too sure that it will reduce congestion. What can reduce congestion is to look internally at the kind of cases that find their way to the Supreme Court.
That is the starting point, not every case should get there. It should be difficult to go to the Supreme Court. “People must learn to accept decisions of the appeal court and let it stop there. But, virtually every case that gets to the Court of Appeal gets to the Supreme Court and that is the problem.
It’s not so much about the number of Supreme Courts that should be established. It should be on the number of cases that are allowed into the Supreme Court”.
However, in his submissions, a senior lawyer, Edward Nwaogu, argued that decentralizing the apex court will improve the dispensation of justice. According to him, “Yes, if that would help us, we should amend the law and make the Supreme Court at Abuja the headquarters and make two to three zones.
The Supreme Court too can have Divisions like the Court of appeal. We can then they find out how they can be managed together to streamline cases. “If they give conflicting judgements, there should be a process by which they streamline it.
“The Court of Appeal that has Divisions has been able to manage the system in such a way that if they find conflicting judgement, they find a way of resolving it. If a Division in Enugu has given a decision that contradicts an earlier judgement of Lagos Division or whatever, you go to the whole process of which one to follow.
“If the later judgement is seen to be given in ignorance of an earlier one, the law is quite clear that the law is given ‘per incuriam’. It denotes the idea that it is decided through inadvertence or ignorance of the relevant law.
“The later judgement would bring in some other things that would have shown that this later one has overruled the earlier. So, the fear of conflicting judgement from different Divisions should not be a hindrance to it. “If decentralizing the Supreme Court will solve the problem of delay, it should be what we call reform”.
Please follow and like us:
