As the Supreme Court attains full bench

WITH the installation on February 26, 2024 of 11 new Justices recently appointed to the Supreme Court by President Bola Tinubu, the apex court has, for the first time in its history, attained its full complement of 21 justices, in consonance with section 230 ( 2) ( b) of the 1999 Constitution, which stipulates that “The Supreme Court of Nigeria shall consist of such number of Justices not exceeding 21 as may be prescribed by an Act of the National Assembly.”

Now that the Supreme Court has broken the jinx and gained its full throttle, the Court should accelerate to its highest in order to attain its Olympian Height. First, the Supreme Court should quickly regain the waning public confidence in the judiciary as a whole. One way the court can achieve this feat is by making a tectonic shift in the social philosophy and jurisprudential outlook emerging from the court over the years.

With a full complement of 21 Justices, the Supreme Court docket can now be decongested by the court sitting in multiple panels. They can now sit in four panels in constitutional cases which require a bench of five Justices and seven Justices for constitutional cases which require a bench of seven Justices, thus clearing the backlog of multiple pending cases. It is sad that most cases filed at the Supreme Court drag on endlessly. For example, speaking at the investiture of 62 new Senior Advocates of Nigeria in Abuja on November 28, 2023, the Chief Justice of Nigeria ( CJN), Justice Olukayode Ariwoola stated that the Supreme Court was bogged down with 6,884 delayed cases. There is no doubt that congestion of cases at the Supreme Court has undermined the justice delivery system in Nigeria. Therefore, it is high time the Supreme Court was decongested of law cases to pave the way for expeditious delivery of justice in Nigeria. It makes no sense that multiple cases pending at the Supreme Court are not heard. Justice delayed, it is said, is justice denied.

The Supreme Court should turn away from the bland legalism and legal positivism that have dominated the landscape of its judicial pronouncements and decisions and return the apex court to a court that pursues substantial justice over technicalities like the Supreme Court Nigerians knew a few decades ago. Justice is rooted in public confidence and public perception. This is why it is said that justice must not only be done but must also be manifestly seen to be done. The essence of the need for justice to be manifestly seen to be done was observed by the Master of the Rolls, Lord Denning, in Metropolitan Properties Co ( FGC) Ltd v Lannon when he stated: “Justice must be rooted in confidence, and confidence is destroyed when right- minded people go away thinking: ‘ The judge was biased.’” The perspectives of the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence should be tailored to help Nigerians realise the overarching objectives of securing their hopes and aspirations; as well as let achieve the ideals of social justice, freedom, equality, and defence of the rule of law as enshrined in the 1999 Constitution. Let the Supreme Court be a Supreme Court for all Nigerians, not the court of the political elites.

Some previous political judgments delivered by the Supreme Court have immersed the court in scathing public criticisms. Some well- settled principles of law have been made by the court to appear not so settled, thereby ridiculing the principle of stare decisis and lowering people’s confidence in the law. Therefore, the Supreme Court should retrace the path of excellence, honour, and integrity to enhance judicial efficacy and efficiency and to bolster public confidence in the Supreme Court.

As much as possible, the Supreme Court should stop descending into the public arena to join issues with its critics. At all times, it must maintain its equanimity and candor in the face of criticism. Dragging the Supreme Court into public controversy is undignified, unbefitting, and shameful. By their exalted position, Justices of the Supreme Court ought not to join issues with their critics in the public square. They should refrain from joining issues with their critics. Criticism of the conduct and judgments of judges in the media is not embarrassing because judicial proceedings are conducted in open court, in the full glare of the public, thus giving members of the public first- class information about the virtues and vices of the individual judges. Addressing the High Court Journalists Association on December 3, 1964, Lord Denning said, “Justice has no place in darkness and secrecy. When a judge sits on a case, he himself is on trial… if there is any misconduct on his part, any bias or prejudice, there is a reporter to keep an eye on him.” However, as Lord Hailsham once said while speaking at a banquet in London, there should be some self- discipline in criticising judges. Let criticisms be well- informed, well- researched, and temperate.

The Supreme Court should transform itself into a court capable of expeditiously dispensing substantial justice for Nigerians of every stature. The Supreme Court is respectfully urged to exercise exceptional brilliance, a high sense of justice, and profound philosophical forensic legal enunciations in adjudicating the cases brought before it in accordance with substantial justice, following the sterling qualities and integrity of their predecessor- brother Justices such as Justices Kayode Eso, Chukwudifu Oputa, Andrews Obaseki, Augustine Nnamani, Anthony Aniagolu, George Adesola Oguntade, Muhammad Lawal Uwais, and Niki Tobi. Throughout their illustrious stint at the Supreme Court, the aforementioned justices distinguished themselves by their integrity and exceptional brilliance in expounding and expanding the law in accordance with substantial justice. Therefore, our current 21 Supreme Court Justices should emulate the shining examples of their aforementioned brother- Justices who had excelled at the Supreme Court.

Finally, the Supreme Court should be reserved for the best and brightest in character and learning, not for deadwoods, lazybones, or corrupt judges. The appointment and elevation of judges to the Supreme Court should be based on merit and high scholarship, not seniority or political patronage.