The Procurement of Court Judgments by Politicians in Nigeria: A Case Study ….Dare Adelekan

The relationship between politics and the judiciary in Nigeria has long been a subject of debate and concern. Over the years, there have been increasing allegations of the procurement of court judgments by politicians, where judicial outcomes, especially in election-related cases, seem to be influenced more by political power, connections, and financial influence than by the rule of law. This phenomenon, though not unique to Nigeria, has greatly undermined public trust in the judicial system and has affected the democratic process.
Overview of the Nigerian Judicial Structure
Nigeria’s judicial system operates through a hierarchical structure, with the High Court serving as the court of first instance, the Court of Appeal handling appeals from lower courts, and the Supreme Court standing as the final arbiter. In theory, this multi-level structure ensures that justice is accessible and that cases are reviewed with increasing scrutiny as they progress. However, in practice, there have been numerous instances where court judgments appear to have been compromised at various levels of the judiciary.
Political Influence on Judicial Outcomes

1. Influence at the High Court Level
   At the High Court level, where many election and political cases begin, there have been instances of judges delivering controversial rulings that seem to favor powerful political figures. These rulings often provoke suspicion, particularly when decisions favoring well-connected politicians or their parties are delivered despite glaring legal shortcomings.

Some of the key tactics alleged to be used at this stage include:
Forum Shopping: Politicians often seek to file cases in courts where they believe the judge is sympathetic to their cause or where they can exert influence.
Ex Parte Orders: Ex parte orders (decisions made without the other party being present) are sometimes granted, effectively stopping an opponent’s political momentum before a proper hearing can occur.
Bribery and Corruption Allegations: There are widespread allegations that some judges at this level may be influenced through financial inducements or political pressure, leading to compromised rulings.

2. The Court of Appeal: A Second Chance?
   The Court of Appeal is meant to serve as a corrective institution, reviewing decisions from lower courts and ensuring that justice is served. However, the trend of questionable judgments has continued at this level. In high-profile political cases, appeals can sometimes stretch over months or even years, during which time the political landscape may shift dramatically.
   In Nigeria, election petitions often move to the Court of Appeal, where politicians look to overturn unfavorable decisions. The appellate court has occasionally delivered judgments that appear to be influenced by political considerations, leading to public outcry. Some of the issues at this level include:
   Inconsistent Judgments: Cases with similar facts and legal arguments sometimes result in different rulings, raising suspicions about undue influence.
   Judges Recusing Themselves: In some politically charged cases, judges have recused themselves, citing pressure or personal reasons, leading to delays and creating room for further manipulations.
3. The Supreme Court: The Final Arbiter or a Political Tool?
   The Supreme Court, as the highest court in the land, is supposed to serve as the ultimate guardian of justice. However, over the years, there have been numerous controversial rulings that have cast doubt on its independence. The Supreme Court’s rulings on election matters, in particular, have been highly contentious.
   A significant case in this regard was the 2019 Supreme Court ruling on the Imo State governorship election, which reversed the election of Emeka Ihedioha (PDP) and declared Hope Uzodinma (APC) the winner, despite contradictions in the number of votes declared. The ruling was met with outrage and accusations of judicial compromise.
   In general, politicians and their legal teams have been known to:
   Seek Favorable Panels: In some instances, it is alleged that politicians influence the composition of the panel of judges hearing their case, ensuring a more favorable outcome.
   Delay Tactics: Politicians often employ delay tactics to stretch the legal process, hoping to manipulate public sentiment or the political environment before a ruling is made.
   Notable Case Studies of Judicial Procurement in Nigeria
4. The Imo State Governorship Election (2019)
   The 2019 Supreme Court judgment that overturned the election of Emeka Ihedioha in favor of Hope Uzodinma remains one of the most controversial political judgments in Nigeria’s history. The court ruled that Uzodinma, who had originally placed fourth in the election, should be declared the winner, citing a miscalculation of votes. The judgment was widely criticized for its handling of evidence and raised concerns about possible political influence on the court.
5. The Bayelsa State Governorship Election (2020)
   In another controversial ruling, the Supreme Court nullified the victory of the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, David Lyon, just a day before his swearing-in as governor, citing irregularities in his running mate’s academic credentials. While the judgment was technically correct, it was seen by some as politically motivated given the timing and the sudden reversal of fortunes.
6. The Rivers State APC Crisis (2019)
   The internal crisis within the APC in Rivers State resulted in conflicting judgments from different courts, leading to the exclusion of the party from contesting the 2019 general elections in the state. The rulings from various courts were seen as a reflection of deep political maneuvering, with both factions seeking favorable judgments by forum shopping and exploiting the judiciary’s weaknesses.
   Impact on Public Trust and Democratic Processes
   The continuous procurement of judgments by politicians has had a corrosive effect on public trust in the judiciary. Many Nigerians now view the judiciary as an extension of the political process, rather than an independent arbiter of justice. This perception undermines the credibility of democratic institutions and weakens the rule of law.
   Furthermore, the manipulation of court processes has a direct impact on Nigeria’s democratic process. When elections are won and lost in courtrooms rather than through the ballot box, it distorts the will of the people and delegitimizes the electoral process. It also fosters a culture of impunity, where politicians believe they can subvert the law as long as they have the right connections or resources.

Conclusion
The procurement of court judgments by politicians in Nigeria is a disturbing trend that threatens the integrity of the judiciary and the democratic process. While the judiciary is supposed to be a neutral and independent institution, its involvement in political maneuvering has created a situation where court rulings are often seen as products of influence rather than justice.
To restore public confidence in the judiciary, there is a need for comprehensive reforms that address corruption within the system, ensure the independence of judges, and introduce greater transparency in the judicial process. Only then can the Nigerian judiciary reclaim its role as the protector of justice and the rule of law.