Legal and public affairs analyst, Liborous Oshoma, has warned that increasing the number of Supreme Court justices will do little to solve the broader crisis in Nigeria’s judiciary, arguing that systemic reforms, technological adoption, and merit-based recruitment are far more critical.
Speaking on ARISE News on Friday, Oshoma described the current state of the justice system as overburdened and outdated, warning that piling more judges onto a broken system will not yield meaningful results.
“That’s part of the solution, but not the one-size-fits-all solution,” Oshoma said in response to ongoing conversations about judicial reform. “I like the fact that they are also looking at the number of cases or the type of cases that will get to the Supreme Court, but it’s far beyond that.”
He highlighted how Lagos State, under then-Attorney General Yemi Osinbajo, recognised court congestion and adopted alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to ease the burden. Yet nationwide, he said, such innovation has not been widely adopted.
“Let me give you the numbers so that we understand where we’re coming from,” he said. “In Lagos, you have Lagos Division, Ikeja Division, Yaba, Badagry, Eti-Osa and Surulere coming up. Count all of these alongside federal high courts, then look at the population — the courts are not enough to handle the volume.”
He said that the problem is worsened by lawyers who pursue frivolous appeals simply to meet criteria for becoming Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN).
“Because of this mad rush for qualification, even frivolous matters are taken on appeal. So you get to the Court of Appeal and find one court dealing with cases from both state and federal high courts,” he said.
Oshoma noted that the Supreme Court itself faces the same congestion, pointing out that although it operates three chambers, a lack of facilities severely limits its ability to sit in multiple panels.
“In Canada, since COVID, courts have moved to e-processes. But here, we only have the procedures on paper. The structure is not there. You file for an e-hearing, but how many courts have internet facilities to handle them?”
He warned that unless infrastructure is improved, merely appointing more judges will make no difference.
“We’re increasing FCT High Court judges from 70 to 100. But if the facilities aren’t there to accommodate them, are we not back to square one?” he asked.
Oshoma also pointed to outdated filing systems as a major bottleneck. “Records of appeal are still being typed manually and physically transmitted. Judges still record proceedings by hand, which consumes time and undermines efficiency.”
He acknowledged Lagos State as a leader in reform, having introduced electronic recording and stenographers, but said even these efforts face limitations.
Turning to the core of judicial credibility, Oshoma stressed that the trust deficit plaguing the judiciary goes beyond infrastructure.
“There is a massive trust deficit, even among lawyers. We need to go back to how we recruit judges. Some appointments are marred by allegations of favouritism and bribery. We’ve had cases where judges allegedly couldn’t pass basic tests but still made the list.”
“It’s not to say we don’t have brilliant judges. We do — top-notch ones. But the bad eggs overshadow them, and in today’s globalised world, bad news spreads faster.”
He argued that reforms must begin with a merit-based, transparent appointment process, free of quotas or political influence.
“When you have senior lawyers with quotas for nominating magistrates, who then rise through the ranks to become Supreme Court justices, it erodes public confidence,” he said.
He called for a total embrace of technology in the judicial system — from e-filing and electronic transmission to remote hearings — backed by proper infrastructure and education for the public.
“Let’s educate people on how the system works. Because the average Nigerian’s understanding of how election petitions or appeals should be handled is often disconnected from legal realities,” he said.
He recalled being reprimanded for criticising the judiciary on TV, but defended his stance: “Even if we are ministers in the temple of justice, if the process is wrong, we should say so. It’s our duty to fix it.”
Oshoma also addressed the abuse of the SAN qualification process, saying many lawyers file unnecessary appeals simply to meet the numerical threshold for elevation.
“You must have at least five cases at the Supreme Court, ten at the Court of Appeal, and 28 at the High Court. So lawyers go out of their way to find — or even buy — cases just to meet the quota,” he alleged.
“Some will appeal interlocutory matters that don’t require appeal. The NBA and courts must act like the late Justice Onalaja, who once scolded a lawyer for using appeals to delay a tenant eviction. That kind of judicial firmness is needed.”
He concluded by saying, “When a judge sits on trial, the judge is also on trial. So the judiciary must hold itself to higher standards. More judges won’t fix the system — merit, transparency, and technology will.”
Boluwatife Enome
Follow us on:
