Justice Saulawa’s admonition

THE admonition by the recently retired Justice of the Supreme Court, Ibrahim Saulawa, against politicians offering “Greek gifts” to judges deserves serious attention. Speaking at the valedictory court session marking his retirement at the mandatory age of 70, Justice Saulawa wondered why politicians should send rams, cows and other gifts to Supreme Court justices. He urged the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) to act against the practice, which he described as demeaning and frustrating.

Justice Saulawa deserves commendation for raising the matter publicly. After 44 years in the legal profession, his testimony cannot be dismissed as conjecture. Indeed, he recalled how, earlier in his judicial career, an influential businessman offered him a brand-new Peugeot vehicle which he rejected. The man subsequently enlisted prominent personalities to persuade him to accept the gift, but he remained unmoved. The same individual later appeared before him as an accused person and was convicted. We thank Justice Saulawa for his service and, particularly, for drawing attention to a practice capable of destroying public confidence in the judiciary. His insistence on integrity, honesty and morality is worthy of celebration. But, his disclosure must provoke something more consequential than applause.

It is good to advise politicians to stop taking cows, rams, cars and other gifts to judges while seeking favours. It is even better for judicial officers confronted with such approaches to document them and report them to the appropriate authorities. Where an offer is reasonably suspected to constitute an attempt to influence judicial proceedings, evidence should be preserved and transmitted to the National Judicial Council (NJC) and, where criminal conduct may be involved, the relevant anti-graft or law-enforcement agency. An attempted corruption of justice should not end merely with the intended recipient saying no. Indeed, politicians who approach judges with compromising gifts may sometimes be testing the waters. If the political class knew that every improper approach to a judge could result in documentation, investigation and possible prosecution, considerably fewer people would dare to arrive with the proverbial cow. The fact that Justice Saulawa rejected such gifts cannot establish that every judicial officer approached in similar circumstances did likewise.

The rams and cows may therefore be only the tip of the iceberg. An ICPC study of corruption in Nigeria’s justice sector provides disturbing context. Eleven of the 123 judges surveyed reported offers amounting collectively to about ₦3.7 billion. The study further linked much of the money reported within the judiciary to attempts to influence election and political disputes. That should worry every Nigerian. Judicial corruption does not consist only of envelopes of cash or livestock delivered at festive periods. Justice can also be corrupted through manipulation of court processes, questionable ex parte orders, deliberate delays, selective assignment of cases or other abuses of judicial authority. The NJC itself has sanctioned judges in recent years for various forms of judicial misconduct. There have also been cases of judges failing to deliver judgments within prescribed periods.

READ ALSO: Politicians kill, judges bury…

Delay itself can become injustice. A judge, who persistently refuses to sit without legitimate reason, can inflict enormous damage on litigants. Cases drag on, witnesses die, memories fade, businesses collapse and valuable evidence disappears. A citizen may ultimately “win” a case after 15 years and still have been comprehensively denied justice. This is particularly important because powerful and politically connected Nigerians inevitably appear before the courts. At present, for instance, the son of a minister is defending a civil claim arising from an alleged $2.1 million Abuja real estate transaction. He denies receiving the money. There is nothing unusual about a minister’s relative being involved in litigation; what matters is that an independent judiciary determines the case fairly and expeditiously. Whether the litigant is a minister’s son or an unknown market trader, Nigerians must be confident that wealth, political connections and access to power cannot alter what happens in court. The judiciary must consequently purge itself relentlessly. Lawyers know the reputation of courts and judicial officers before whom they practise. Where lawyers begin avoiding particular courts because they believe justice there is compromised, the system is already in grave danger. Judges should also remember that a politician who corrupts a judicial officer is unlikely to keep the transaction permanently secret. He will tell associates; word spreads; and eventually the judge becomes known not for jurisprudence but for a price.

None of this suggests that corruption is peculiar to the judiciary. Nigeria has serious ethical problems in politics, the civil service, banking, business, the media and many other sectors. But corruption in the justice system is uniquely dangerous because the courts are the place society goes to when every other institution fails. A corrupt politician may steal public resources; a corrupt banker may violate financial trust; a corrupt journalist may distort information. But when the institution charged with deciding what is lawful and unlawful itself becomes purchasable, the citizen loses the final peaceful means of obtaining redress. That is why there must never come a time when corruption pays in Nigeria, least of all in its courts.

Justice Saulawa has performed a useful final public service by sounding the alarm. The CJN and NJC should take his admonition further by strengthening clear rules for gifts to judicial officers, confidential reporting channels for improper approaches, protection for judges who report attempted inducement, investigation of credible allegations and firm sanctions where wrongdoing is established. Judges, for their part, must understand that merely rejecting a corrupt offer is commendable, but exposing the person attempting to corrupt justice is better. The judiciary cannot control whether a politician arrives bearing a ram, a cow, a car or an envelope. But it can determine what happens next. The surest deterrent is for anyone contemplating such an approach to know that the gift may become evidence and the giver may become an accused person.

The cancer of judicial corruption must be exercised. If the justice system becomes corrupted beyond public confidence, Nigeria itself is imperilled.