Continued from Monday January 2, 2012

A Lagos-based legal practitioner, Mr Chimezie Ihekweazu, in concluding part of his article on the need to reinforce the Nigerian judiciary for optimal performance,  posits  that lawyers have the power  to re-engineer the judicial system and make it  better.

In filing processes, payments are usually made for service, except where a lawyer undertakes to serve in some cases, so the Sheriff or bailiff should ensure that service is effected promptly since it is expected that monies for service should be transmitted to the Bailiff Section as soon as it is paid. Monies paid for service of processes or Court assignment as statutorily required should be transmitted to the appropriate department for use. A delay or failure in this regard will be counter-productive. The administrative system must ensure that its officers deliver. Their positions must not be reduced to “a road block where you pay as you go” for service which they earn monthly salary from tax payers money and where litigants pay for such service.

Legal Practitioners also have their role to play in ensuring an effective judiciary. In truth, lawyers constitute a large number of critics of the judicial system but the extent to which they have through their branches and national structures assisted in bringing solutions to the system remains abysmally low. I must confess that the Bar has the power and potential to re-engineer the Judicial System and make it work better in co-operation with other related Institutions under the Justice Sector. The judiciary cannot exist without lawyers in advocacy. Advocates in practice must earn their living through Processes initiated and conducted in our courts. A failed court system transcends to a total failure of preserved rights under the Constitution and even loss of livelihood for Advocates in the System. Even solicitors will be affected as the legality of their professional activities may have recourse to the Courts for interpretation, validity or other required perfections. It is in this regard that I dare say that every lawyer must rise and play his or her role in a way that will contribute towards an effective Judiciary in the Country.

Professional monitoring helps build the society. It creates sanity within the respective sectors in related fields and by extension adds value to the political order and socio-economic life of the citizens. How then can this be achieved in the Judiciary? The Bar must look inwards and give effect to its internal Structures allowed under its National Constitution and the respective Branch Constitutions. All committees and office structures must be made potent to give effect to its functions. In relation to the Judiciary, the Bar must create Monitoring Committees across its Branches to be constituted by members with courage and integrity to monitor the Judicial System. These Committees must serve as watchdogs on the performance level of the judicial officers and administrative personnel of the respective courts to report to the national body through the branches or to the branches as the case may be, for appropriate steps to be taken regarding the affected judicial division. The practice of law must not be allowed to suffer or die. Members of the Bar must rise to the occasion and help change our society through their work. Effective disciplinary measures in place must be reinforced and strengthened to caution members against wrongdoings or any other professional misconduct. The Bar must continually sustain training for its members and make them realize the benefits of competence as a tool for result oriented service in the judiciary and administration of justice. In civil and criminal Proceedings, the Bar must strive to present members, rich in discipline and diligent in handling of their matters. This approach will definitely make the work of the judge easy and also bring benefit to the society.

The constitution guarantees the right of appeal. This right in most cases has suffered terribly as most structures enabling the exercise of their rights are either weak or full of gaps that cause unnecessary delays. Clearly and from the structures of the Courts of first instance to the Court of Appeal and to the Supreme Court, the process of transmission of Records and Exhibits appear slow in most cases thus making Practitioners to personally follow up on these processes.
In court proceedings, reasons for adjournments range from tardiness of practitioners, to obstacles created by Administrative Staff of Courts and other reasons as affect the Judicial Officers. In most Divisions of the Court of Appeal the Panels cannot constitute quorum due to one reason or the other. Presently most Judges are on National assignments resulting from Election Petitions across the Country. Seminars and Workshops are organized and fixed for Judges without recourse to adjourned matters and Hearing dates for matters thus leading to frustrating adjournments and unnecessary delays. A case of doing the right thing in the Wrong manner. The effect is that the backlog of appeal cases keeps piling up while new ones are filed daily in those Divisions. The danger is that Appeals filed this year, unless where accelerated hearing is granted, may have to wait for between two to five years before it is considered and heard. The question one may ask is whether it is not possible to have a well defined yearly Calendar For every Court so that their yearly programmes and events can be adjusted with regard to pending matters before the respective Courts. This will help so that where matters cannot proceed proper notification are issued and sent either directly or electronically to Counsel.

The worst situation with due respect is at the Supreme Court where few Justices, presently face the daily challenge of dealing with Appeals with only one Panel sitting. The Court has the capacity of functioning with at least two or three Panels in terms of Legal Framework. Appeals are filed in hundreds yearly while the capacity of the Court under the Constitution remains Twenty two, with the Court operating with less than fifteen presently. In truth, the Court is presently operating with limited number of Justices and under poor Support Systems. There is the need to sustain the legal Framework and ensure consistency in its Constitutional provisions. It is believed that over fifteen thousand cases may be pending before the Supreme Court. This number is very high as one wonders how many of these cases can be concluded in three to five years with the Court working at full capacity. It will indeed be a tall ambition. It is my view that there is the need for Constitutional amendment to increase the number of Justices to thirty or thirty-five. In addition the Age of Appointment should be between forty-five and fifty-five. There should also be regular health checks every three years to be conducted by Recognised Health Institutions as is done in some companies and government establishments. Appointments should also not be limited to Justices of the Court of Appeal as is presently the Custom but extended to the BAR and the ACADEMIA in the case of a person that have shown exceptional distinction with experience of having handled high number of Cases before the Supreme Court and Industry in terms of law publications. This will improve on the capacity and output of the Court.

In the Supreme Court there are no research assistants and the administrative structures are equally weak. The process of transmission of Processes to the Court and arrangements of processes in Appeal files for Justices to take on matters is very slow. There are instances of cases where Processes filed are not transmitted to the Court Files for months, just for the lawyer to appear in Court and for his matter to be adjourned for that singular reason. In fact in desirable cases the Court should stand down the case and order the Registrar to produce the documents for proceedings to go on. It is an affront on the Court which calls for immediate action. There are no pre-hearings before an Appeal comes up for hearing in open Court and the result is that an Appeal fixed for hearing can be adjourned for the slightest reasons. A Pre-hearing before a Registrar helps to certify a case to be ripe for hearing and clears all incidental issues that will require to be regularized. This will help so that once a case is fixed for hearing before the Court retaining its majesty and powers, there will be 99% certainty that it will go on. Presently it is said that the Court is dealing with Old Appeals filed between the periods 2000 to 2005. Working under these conditions and circumstances very few judgments are delivered. Unless in criminal cases and Election Petition matters, Civil Appeals filed this year may not be heard until 2020 or even beyond that time. How then would a Litigant feel if he or she will have to wait for between fifteen to twenty years to know his or her fate in a judicial process terminating at the Supreme Court. Can the rights created under the Constitution still be classified as viable? Lawyers and Litigants lament regularly of travelling from far distances for Appeals at the Supreme Court only to witness an adjournment of the Matter. Where the Court will not sit there is no medium or Structure enabling Litigants or their Counsel to be notified.

We must admit that there is danger which calls for concern. We cannot continue to watch and hope. The Government and the affected Professional Bodies and Institutions must rise to the occasion and help restore the System. It is not impossible. It is very possible and doable if only the will is there. We have the resources and qualified manpower.

In the present state of our Judiciary and Justice Delivery System there are clear indications for immediate implementation of changes that will aid in improved services. Our Socio-economic wellbeing to a great extent depends on its potency and effectiveness. It concerns all of us no matter how peaceful we live and manage our affairs. Recently the Chief Justice of Nigeria set up a Special Committee for Reform of the Judiciary under the Chairmanship of the Retired Chief Justice of Nigeria Hon. Justice Muhammad Lawal Uwais. This is a welcome development as it could not have come at a better time. The success of the Judiciary will bring good governance, peaceful coexistence and guarantee welfare and security. The earlier the better they say so let us act fast. Our positive step in this direction will help the present and future Generations to come.

Concluded

Chimezie Ihekweazu wrote in from Lagos.