While the problems of inefficient court system and delayed justice in the country remain, suggestions continue to emerge on how to effectively deal with them.
At this year’s edition of its Annual Business Luncheon, commercial law firm, SPA Ajibade & Co, considered the idea of separating justice administration from the administration of the court itself.
The law firm feels that perhaps if judges are freed from the burden of managing the administrative affairs of the court, they will have time to attend to more cases, thereby enhancing the speed of justice delivery.
The luncheon, with the theme, “The administration of the courts vs The administration of justice – The benefits of drawing a distinction,” held last week at the Metropolitan Club, Victoria Island, Lagos, and brought together judges and lawyers.
The Principal Partner, SPA Ajibade & Co, Dr Babatunde Ajibade (SAN), said stakeholders must never get tired of talking about the problems and suggesting solutions, believing that one day the intractable problem of delayed justice will eventually give in.
The lead speaker, Mr Fola Arthur-Worrey, a former Solicitor-General in Lagos State, said the failure to make a clear distinction between justice administration and court administration had for so long hampered the efficiency of the justice system.
He said it was time Nigeria took a cue from the United States of America, the United Kingdom and South Africa, where the two components of the justice system have been separated.
Arthur-Worrey said, “I thought that often we don’t make the distinction in Nigeria between the administration of justice, which is supposed to provide the end product – judgment and ruling – and the administration of the court or the physical elements of the court management, without which the administration of justice itself will be largely inefficient.
“Things like power supply, generators, diesel etc should not be the concern of judges. But today, judges are the ones that basically manage their courts. They are the ones that replace bulbs etc, because the system is just not fast enough to catch up.
“I know for instance that many judges don’t have competent secretaries. They are typing their judgments themselves and it has got to a stage that it is an expectation but it’s not supposed to be.
“All you require from a judge is his or her intellectual capacity, understanding of the law and a level of efficiency in applying the law.”
Arthur-Worrey advocated that like in the UK, the US and South Africa, maintenance of the court structures should be taken over by an agency of the executive.
He said, “In the US, courts construction, renting, maintenance and services are undertaken by the General Services Bureau, an executive arm saddled with the responsibility of maintaining all federal buildings. So, that is a clear distinction between the administration of justice and the administration of the courts.
“In South Africa, the courts are administered by the Court Administration Authority, created under the Court Administration Act, which is administered by the Attorney General and it is a body independent of the executive with responsibility for the care, control and management of courthouses and other public properties set aside for the use of the court.
“The body is responsible for the provisions of not just the buildings but the facilities.
“In the UK, the courts are administered by Her Majesty Courts and Tribunal Services, an executive agency of the Ministry of Justice, headed by an administrator and is exclusively responsible for the administration of civil, family and criminal courts in England and Wales.
“I suggest that we adopt the systems of the US, UK and South Africa whereby the executive is responsible, through a dedicated agency, for the construction and maintenance of all court buildings and facilities to free their Lordships and the registrars of these onerous tasks for which in any event they have little or no training.
“This will involve some constitutional amendment because you have to strip the NJC of those powers.”
Arthur-Worrey said there was also a need for a constitutional amendment that would enable the judiciary to truly enjoy financial autonomy.
Agreeing with him, the Oyo State Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr Oluseun Abimbola, said where the executive was even willing to allow the judiciary enjoy financial autonomy, there was no structure in place to achieve it.
He said, “For instance, if we are going to buy a computer in the executive, you will have to pass it through some form of tender. And even after it comes out of tender, the outcome will still have to go through due process under the procurement laws. It is after it comes out of the procurement process that you can do the physical procurement.
“Do these structures exist in the judiciary if we are to implement financial independence or we will have to lean on the structures that the executive already has in place? This question has remained on the table, yet un-answered.
“It’s not so simple to say that the executive is not willing to implement financial autonomy.”
Abimbola testified to the fact that the failure to separate justice administration from court administration had created a clog in the wheel of justice.
He said, “We have carried on for decades assuming that as we administer justice, we are also administering the court at the same time. But what we have started to see is the fact that the failure to take proper notice of the fact that we lack a proper structure for the administration of the court is now affecting the administration of justice.”
He proposed an amendment to the laws that would allow the National Judicial Council and the Judicial Service Commissions in the states take up the responsibility of court administration.
He said, “Currently, we are pushing a bill to widen the functions of the Judicial Service Commission to be able to allow them to have more administrative and managerial powers on the court.
“In-between judicial appointments, the Judicial Service Commission does nothing. I sit as a statutory member of the Judicial Service Commission in Oyo State; so, I know that in-between judicial appointments, discipline and other issues of staffing, there is little or nothing to fully occupy the Judicial Service Commission members. The members of the Judicial Service Commission sit permanently as full members, which means they must be fully engaged.”
But a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr Babatunde Fagbohunlu, argued that much as the idea of creating a clear dichotomy between justice administration and court administration sounded beautiful, it might do little to address the problem of delayed justice if there was no change of orientation among the stakeholders in the court.
Fagbolunlu described the problem of delayed justice in the court as a reflection of the falling values of the Nigerian society.
He said, “If there is one lesson I’ve learnt, the problems lie with us, not the rules. The judges, the lawyers, the court officials and it even goes beyond those to the leaders in this country, those who are responsible for implementing the constitution.
“It is good to talk about the dichotomy between administration of justice and administration of the court, but I think that there is a certain level of sophistication that we should have attained before this kind of distinction becomes relevant. I think that our problems are a lot more rudimentary, indeed, more egregious than this distinction between the administration of justice and the administration of the court.”
Justice Abimbola Obaseki-Adejumo of the Court of Appeal, who stood in for Justice Sidi Bage of the Supreme Court, as the chairman on the occasion, lamented the piecemeal release of the judiciary budget by the executive.
Justice Obaseki-Adejumo quoted an online report stating that out of the N110bn appropriated for the Judiciary in the 2018 budget, only N10bn had been released.
“Why are they releasing the judiciary’s funds in trickles? They budgeted N110bn, only N10bn is released. So, how do we share N10bn when we are expecting N110bn?” she queried.
Justice Obaseki-Adejumo also described the accommodation arrangement for judges as below standard and not fit-for-purpose.
She said, “Ideally, accommodation for judges should be provided before the appointment but the reality in public housing is shocking. Immediately the appointments are made, nothing is on the ground.
“Most judges prefer to stay in their own houses than the official quarters because the quarters are not maintained. The generators will not work, My Lords cannot work; the security is very poor. This is the stark reality.”
She stressed that the kind of accommodation being provided for judges now were not suitable.
“No matter the number of people in your house, you must have a study; that is your haven as a judicial officer. Again, there must be a chalet. They say you cannot have friends, you cannot have family members; so, what do you do? You put them in a chalet when they come. You must have a BQ, your driver must be there, your cook must be there. So, this is the standard. But what are we getting now?
“Now, we are beginning to be kept in blocks of flat; so, the basic things are not there. That is what is going on now. Why can’t I stay in my house? But at the federal level you cannot stay in your house; it is forbidden,” she added.
Justice Obaseki-Adejumo said the same thing applied to the courthouses built by the executive without the input of the judiciary.
She said, “If your governor graciously decides to build your high court, you have to say thank you; how dare you complain? And he is using his contractor and the contractor doesn’t know what a functional court looks like.
“From outside, it is beautiful but go in and see, he doesn’t know where and how to build the chambers; he doesn’t know what you require in the chambers. A chamber should have an anteroom; a chamber should have a secretary room; a chamber should have a dressing room. When you don’t have that, how do you think a judge will function? But the man says I have built you a house. These are the problems we are having. At the federal, we don’t have that problem but at the state, we have that problem,” she added.
To make justice delivery more efficient, Justice Obaseki-Adejumo advocated more use of technology and continuous training for the court support staff.
“The ineptitude of just one judicial staff can pull down the court. If the bailiff refuses to serve, if it is the Court of Appeal, you have lost a whole year; if it is the high court, you have lost three months. Just because somebody did a silly thing; he forgot to put the proof of service in the file. So, a lot of training has to go on.”
She stressed also that more judges must be appointed.
At this year’s edition of its Annual Business Luncheon, commercial law firm, SPA Ajibade & Co, considered the idea of separating justice administration from the administration of the court itself.
The law firm feels that perhaps if judges are freed from the burden of managing the administrative affairs of the court, they will have time to attend to more cases, thereby enhancing the speed of justice delivery.
The luncheon, with the theme, “The administration of the courts vs The administration of justice – The benefits of drawing a distinction,” held last week at the Metropolitan Club, Victoria Island, Lagos, and brought together judges and lawyers.
The Principal Partner, SPA Ajibade & Co, Dr Babatunde Ajibade (SAN), said stakeholders must never get tired of talking about the problems and suggesting solutions, believing that one day the intractable problem of delayed justice will eventually give in.
The lead speaker, Mr Fola Arthur-Worrey, a former Solicitor-General in Lagos State, said the failure to make a clear distinction between justice administration and court administration had for so long hampered the efficiency of the justice system.
He said it was time Nigeria took a cue from the United States of America, the United Kingdom and South Africa, where the two components of the justice system have been separated.
Arthur-Worrey said, “I thought that often we don’t make the distinction in Nigeria between the administration of justice, which is supposed to provide the end product – judgment and ruling – and the administration of the court or the physical elements of the court management, without which the administration of justice itself will be largely inefficient.
“Things like power supply, generators, diesel etc should not be the concern of judges. But today, judges are the ones that basically manage their courts. They are the ones that replace bulbs etc, because the system is just not fast enough to catch up.
“I know for instance that many judges don’t have competent secretaries. They are typing their judgments themselves and it has got to a stage that it is an expectation but it’s not supposed to be.
“All you require from a judge is his or her intellectual capacity, understanding of the law and a level of efficiency in applying the law.”
Arthur-Worrey advocated that like in the UK, the US and South Africa, maintenance of the court structures should be taken over by an agency of the executive.
He said, “In the US, courts construction, renting, maintenance and services are undertaken by the General Services Bureau, an executive arm saddled with the responsibility of maintaining all federal buildings. So, that is a clear distinction between the administration of justice and the administration of the courts.
“In South Africa, the courts are administered by the Court Administration Authority, created under the Court Administration Act, which is administered by the Attorney General and it is a body independent of the executive with responsibility for the care, control and management of courthouses and other public properties set aside for the use of the court.
“The body is responsible for the provisions of not just the buildings but the facilities.
“In the UK, the courts are administered by Her Majesty Courts and Tribunal Services, an executive agency of the Ministry of Justice, headed by an administrator and is exclusively responsible for the administration of civil, family and criminal courts in England and Wales.
“I suggest that we adopt the systems of the US, UK and South Africa whereby the executive is responsible, through a dedicated agency, for the construction and maintenance of all court buildings and facilities to free their Lordships and the registrars of these onerous tasks for which in any event they have little or no training.
“This will involve some constitutional amendment because you have to strip the NJC of those powers.”
Arthur-Worrey said there was also a need for a constitutional amendment that would enable the judiciary to truly enjoy financial autonomy.
Agreeing with him, the Oyo State Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr Oluseun Abimbola, said where the executive was even willing to allow the judiciary enjoy financial autonomy, there was no structure in place to achieve it.
He said, “For instance, if we are going to buy a computer in the executive, you will have to pass it through some form of tender. And even after it comes out of tender, the outcome will still have to go through due process under the procurement laws. It is after it comes out of the procurement process that you can do the physical procurement.
“Do these structures exist in the judiciary if we are to implement financial independence or we will have to lean on the structures that the executive already has in place? This question has remained on the table, yet un-answered.
“It’s not so simple to say that the executive is not willing to implement financial autonomy.”
Abimbola testified to the fact that the failure to separate justice administration from court administration had created a clog in the wheel of justice.
He said, “We have carried on for decades assuming that as we administer justice, we are also administering the court at the same time. But what we have started to see is the fact that the failure to take proper notice of the fact that we lack a proper structure for the administration of the court is now affecting the administration of justice.”
He proposed an amendment to the laws that would allow the National Judicial Council and the Judicial Service Commissions in the states take up the responsibility of court administration.
He said, “Currently, we are pushing a bill to widen the functions of the Judicial Service Commission to be able to allow them to have more administrative and managerial powers on the court.
“In-between judicial appointments, the Judicial Service Commission does nothing. I sit as a statutory member of the Judicial Service Commission in Oyo State; so, I know that in-between judicial appointments, discipline and other issues of staffing, there is little or nothing to fully occupy the Judicial Service Commission members. The members of the Judicial Service Commission sit permanently as full members, which means they must be fully engaged.”
But a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr Babatunde Fagbohunlu, argued that much as the idea of creating a clear dichotomy between justice administration and court administration sounded beautiful, it might do little to address the problem of delayed justice if there was no change of orientation among the stakeholders in the court.
Fagbolunlu described the problem of delayed justice in the court as a reflection of the falling values of the Nigerian society.
He said, “If there is one lesson I’ve learnt, the problems lie with us, not the rules. The judges, the lawyers, the court officials and it even goes beyond those to the leaders in this country, those who are responsible for implementing the constitution.
“It is good to talk about the dichotomy between administration of justice and administration of the court, but I think that there is a certain level of sophistication that we should have attained before this kind of distinction becomes relevant. I think that our problems are a lot more rudimentary, indeed, more egregious than this distinction between the administration of justice and the administration of the court.”
Justice Abimbola Obaseki-Adejumo of the Court of Appeal, who stood in for Justice Sidi Bage of the Supreme Court, as the chairman on the occasion, lamented the piecemeal release of the judiciary budget by the executive.
Justice Obaseki-Adejumo quoted an online report stating that out of the N110bn appropriated for the Judiciary in the 2018 budget, only N10bn had been released.
“Why are they releasing the judiciary’s funds in trickles? They budgeted N110bn, only N10bn is released. So, how do we share N10bn when we are expecting N110bn?” she queried.
Justice Obaseki-Adejumo also described the accommodation arrangement for judges as below standard and not fit-for-purpose.
She said, “Ideally, accommodation for judges should be provided before the appointment but the reality in public housing is shocking. Immediately the appointments are made, nothing is on the ground.
“Most judges prefer to stay in their own houses than the official quarters because the quarters are not maintained. The generators will not work, My Lords cannot work; the security is very poor. This is the stark reality.”
She stressed that the kind of accommodation being provided for judges now were not suitable.
“No matter the number of people in your house, you must have a study; that is your haven as a judicial officer. Again, there must be a chalet. They say you cannot have friends, you cannot have family members; so, what do you do? You put them in a chalet when they come. You must have a BQ, your driver must be there, your cook must be there. So, this is the standard. But what are we getting now?
“Now, we are beginning to be kept in blocks of flat; so, the basic things are not there. That is what is going on now. Why can’t I stay in my house? But at the federal level you cannot stay in your house; it is forbidden,” she added.
Justice Obaseki-Adejumo said the same thing applied to the courthouses built by the executive without the input of the judiciary.
She said, “If your governor graciously decides to build your high court, you have to say thank you; how dare you complain? And he is using his contractor and the contractor doesn’t know what a functional court looks like.
“From outside, it is beautiful but go in and see, he doesn’t know where and how to build the chambers; he doesn’t know what you require in the chambers. A chamber should have an anteroom; a chamber should have a secretary room; a chamber should have a dressing room. When you don’t have that, how do you think a judge will function? But the man says I have built you a house. These are the problems we are having. At the federal, we don’t have that problem but at the state, we have that problem,” she added.
To make justice delivery more efficient, Justice Obaseki-Adejumo advocated more use of technology and continuous training for the court support staff.
“The ineptitude of just one judicial staff can pull down the court. If the bailiff refuses to serve, if it is the Court of Appeal, you have lost a whole year; if it is the high court, you have lost three months. Just because somebody did a silly thing; he forgot to put the proof of service in the file. So, a lot of training has to go on.”
She stressed also that more judges must be appointed.
In this article: