Headlines
Opinion: Judiciary in the Dock
By Sehinde Omoniyi
“Somewhere along the way, the balance of power between the prosecution, the defense and the judiciary shifted. We have to readjust it. The stakes are so high – the well-being of so many communities and the trajectories of so many lives, public safety depends on our collective faith in fairness and our view of the law as legitimate” – Emily Bazelon
Over the last few years, the Nigerian judiciary has been perceived as the weeping child of the three arms of government. Whether correctly or otherwise, the common truth is that the man on the street thinks something is fundamentally wrong with the judicial system in Nigeria. This perception places a huge moral burden on the judiciary in this dispensation, and in going forward.
For the first time in the history of Nigeria, judges’ homes were invaded, many top judicial officers are facing trial, and at the height of it all, a sitting Chief Justice was made subject of a public ridicule and in the end, Justice Walter Onnoghen is recorded as the first Chief Justice of Nigeria to be forced out of office on allegations of corruption.
To put it mildly, the integrity of the judiciary in Nigeria has never been this subjected to scrutiny and odium. To compound the problem of the judiciary, the narrow-minded verdict of the Supreme Court in the now celebrated case of the Osun State Governorship Election between Adeleke v Oyetola, seem to have further widened the gulf of trust between the people and the judiciary.
However, the 2019 Presidential Election Tribunal presents another presents another opportunity to the judiciary, to rediscover itself.
Since March, the Tribunal has been fed with tons of evidence on what happened and did not happen by both parties – People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and its Presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar who is seeking the court’s confirmation of himself as the winner and (or) disqualify candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) President Muhammadu Buhari. Aside the APC and President Buhari, the other respondent is the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) whose conduct of that election has been severally lampooned.
For those who may not have followed the proceedings athe Tribunal, it is important to note that the Petitioner has argued that:
i) The 2nd Respondent (Muhammadu Buhari), was not duly elected by majority of lawful votes cast at the February 23, 2019 Presidential Election.
ii) The election of Muhammadu Buhari is invalid by reason of corrupt practices
iii) The election of Muhammadu Buhari is invalid by reason of non- compliance with the provision of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended)
iv) Muhammadu Buhari was at the time of the election not qualified to contest the said election, and
v) The 2nd Respondent (Muhammadu Buhari) submitted to INEC an affidavit containing false information of a fundamental nature in aid of his qualification for the said election.
Indeed, in the history of election petitions since Nigeria’s democracy, the amount of witnesses and documented evidence presented by the petitioner including expert witness, has not been recorded.
In a matter of hours, the five-man Appeal Court Judges would be expected to deliver their verdict based on the evidences brought by them. Their task is one which stands to make or mare the judiciary.
Political grandstanding notwithstanding, intimidations from the gladiators and their agents notwithstanding, upon the shoulders of these five judges stands the hope and future of the Nigerian judiciary.
The options before these judges are clear. They either choose to stand by truth supported by evidences presented before them or they may adopt the new albatross of the Nigerian judiciary called technicality and pass over the burden of facing the facts as they are. Whichever way they choose t go, it is a deeper battle of them and their conscience, and the future of the country.
And as stated above by journalist and legal researcher, Emily Bazelon, the judges as the Tribunal owe the legal profession, to Nigerians and humanity in general to display justice and fairness. The judiciary obviously needs a readjustment. “The well-being of so many communities and the trajectories of so many lives, public safety depends on our collective faith in fairness and our view of the law as legitimate”, Emily is not alone in this thought.
The world attention in this coming days is riveted on the Nigerian judiciary, the decision or indecision of the five-man appeal tribunal is sacrosanct.
Sehinde Omooniyi is a Socio-Political writer based in Abuja
United States Representative Riley Moors has said further military strikes against Islamic State-linked militants in Nigeria could follow recent operations ordered by President Donald Trump, describing the actions as aimed at improving security and protecting Christian communities facing violence.
Moore made the remarks during a televised interview in which he addressed U.S. military strikes carried out on Christmas Day against militant targets in North-west Nigeria.
The strikes were conducted in coordination with the Nigerian government, according to U.S. and Nigerian officials.
“President Trump is not trying to bring war to Nigeria, he’s bringing peace and security to Nigeria and to the thousands of Christians who face horrific violence and death,” Moore said.
He said the Christmas Day strikes against Islamic State affiliates had provided hope to Christians in Nigeria, particularly in areas affected by repeated attacks during past festive periods.
According to U.S. authorities, the strikes targeted camps used by Islamic State-linked groups operating in parts of north-west Nigeria.
Nigerian officials confirmed that the operation was carried out with intelligence support from Nigerian security agencies as part of ongoing counter-terrorism cooperation between both countries.
The United States Africa Command said the operation was intended to degrade the operational capacity of extremist groups responsible for attacks on civilians and security forces.
Nigerian authorities have described the targeted groups as a threat to national security, noting their involvement in killings, kidnappings and raids on rural communities.
Moore said the strikes marked a shift from previous years in which attacks were carried out against civilians during the Christmas period. He said the U.S. administration was focused on preventing further violence by targeting militant groups before they could launch attacks.
U.S. officials have said the military action was carried out with the consent of the Nigerian government and formed part of broader security cooperation between the two countries. Nigeria has received intelligence, training and logistical support from international partners as it seeks to contain militant activity.
Moore had previously called for stronger international attention to attacks on Christian communities in Nigeria and has urged continued U.S. engagement in addressing extremist violence. He said further action would depend on developments on the ground and continued coordination with Nigerian authorities.
Nigerian officials have maintained that counter-terrorism operations are directed at armed groups threatening civilians, regardless of religion, and have reiterated their commitment to restoring security across affected regions.
World-renowned boxer Anthony Joshua on Monday survived a ghastly road accident in Makun, Ogun State.
Eyewitnesses report that the incident occurred along a busy highway of the Lagos-Ibadan expressway.
The vehicle carrying Joshua, a Lexus Jeep with the number plate, KRD 850 HN, reportedly collided with a stationary truck under circumstances that are still being investigated.
Joshua reportedly sustained minor injuries, while two persons were said to have died on the spot.
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has cautioned that any attempt to hurriedly re‑gazette Nigeria’s new tax laws could undermine parliamentary oversight and set a dangerous constitutional precedent.
Atiku’s warning follows public scrutiny over reports that the Tax Reform Acts signed by President Bola Tinubu differ from the versions passed by the National Assembly. Lawmakers, including Abdussamad Dasuki, raised concerns that the alterations could pose serious legal and constitutional risks, noting that they were not backed by any constitutional framework.
In a statement on X, Atiku said the directive to re-gazette the Acts effectively confirms “that the gazetted version of the Tinubu Tax Act does not reflect what was duly passed by the National Assembly,” calling it “a grave constitutional issue.”
He emphasized that under Section 58 of the 1999 Constitution, a bill only becomes law after passage by both chambers, presidential assent, and gazetting.
“Gazetting is merely an administrative act of publication. It does not create, amend, or validate a law,” Atiku said, adding that any post-passage insertion, deletion, or modification without legislative approval constitutes forgery rather than a clerical error.
Atiku further warned that rushing a re-gazetting while legislative investigations are ongoing “undermines parliamentary oversight and sets a dangerous precedent,” stressing that the only lawful approach is “fresh legislative consideration, re-passage by both chambers, fresh presidential assent, and proper gazetting.”
The former vice president clarified that his position is not opposition to tax reform but a defence of constitutional order.
“This is a defence of the integrity of the legislative process and a rejection of any attempt to normalise constitutional breaches through procedural shortcuts,” he said.
The Federal government has denied wrongdoing, insisting the laws will take effect as scheduled on January 1, 2026, while the National Assembly has directed the issuance of Certified True Copies of the Acts to ensure clarity and accuracy.
