X-raying key reforms and judiciary’s downside in the last three years

By Vivian Okejeme

In the last three years, the judiciary has witnessed some key reforms in the country, with focus on digital transformation, quick justice dispensation, judicial independence, criminal justice reform and improved welfare packages for judicial officers.
These judiciary reforms were initiated with the aim to fully assert laws, ensure rights are protected and government activities remain subject to legal scrutiny.
With these continued reforms, democracy is strengthened and justice promoted for national development.
Beginning with the digitization of court processes, the reform is geared towards reducing delays and improving access to justice.
With the ongoing reform, various courts in the country have adopted technology-driven systems such as: electronic filing of cases, virtual court hearings,
electronic service of court processes, digital recording of proceedings and online access to judgments and legal documents.
Another profound reform is the Evidence Act (Amendment) Act 2023. With this reform, the Justice system has been modernized and Nigeria’s evidentiary system aligned with global best practices.
Basically, this move has made it legal to recognize electronic records and digital evidence as well as promotes easier admissibility of digital communications in court.
More so, the amended Evidence Act, has made it possible for electronically signed documents to be acceptable just as it has improved framework for remote notarization and affidavits.
The Justice sector has equally witnessed reform in the Expansion of Criminal Justice Reforms (ACJA/ACJL).
The Administration of Criminal Justice Act of 2015 as a federal law was designed to unify and modernized criminal justice system.
In a bid to actualize the purpose, the Federal Government as well as stakeholders in the judiciary have developed national implementation standards to improve consistency across states.
The reform has made the 36 States to adopt the criminal justice Act with the aim to reduce prison congestion and promotion of plea bargaining.
Moreover, the reform has paved the way to checkmate restrictions on unlawful detention, improved protection of suspects’ rights and greater use of non-custodial sentencing.
Another ongoing reform is in the area of granting Judicial Financial Autonomy. The reform has provided opportunity for stronger enforcement of judicial independence through direct funding arrangements for state judiciaries, reduced executive interference in judicial finances.
Further to that, there has been advocacy for constitutional protection of judicial budgets, which seeks to strengthen separation of powers and improve court administration.
In the same vein, there is improved Welfare and Salary Structure for Judges.
After years of agitation, reforms were introduced to improve salaries of judicial officers, conditions of service, retirement benefits and infrastructure for courts.
The objective is to enhance judicial integrity, reduce corruption risks, and improve efficiency.
In the last three years, the Justice sector has placed emphasis on Reduction and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) to reduce case backlog.
Undoubtedly, Courts have promoted mediation, arbitration, multi-door courthouses and
faster case management systems, thereby reducing congestion in courts and accelerating dispute resolution.
In addition, the country has witnessed several ongoing legislative reforms.
In this regard, the National Assembly has considered amendments to several justice-related laws to modernize procedure and enforcement, including reforms on electronic service of court documents, enforcement of judgments and modern civil procedure rules.
Meanwhile, in the years under review, there are some controversial cases that are still not satisfactorily resolved in the eyes of the public.
Cases relating to security and terrorism have been greeted with criticisms. Victims and families affected by the insecurity are of the opinion that the prosecution is slow.
Expressing their dissatisfaction, they decry long delays in court proceedings, political undertones interferences and lack of transparency.
The victims of terrorist sects like Boko Haram are contesting lack or limited public information on the outcome of the cases and conflicting judgements.
Another controversial case not satisfactorily decided was Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra’s(IPOB) matter. The circumstances surrounding Kanu’s arrest and extradition from Kenya, jurisdiction of the court of trial and due process are issues that continues to generate public interest on the outcome of the trial.
Opinions are still stuck between the section of people who see him as a separatist agitator championing instability and those that believe he is a political detainee.
Moreover, there are high-profile corruption cases involving politicians which have continuously generate controverses.
So many of these cases against these politicians have had endless adjournments or dismissed on technicality grounds.