Opinion
Quick Justice; Panacea For Insecurity
The administration and dispensation of justice is the chief purpose of the judiciary. The judiciary, being an integral part of government, especially in a democratic setup, is so important that whenever it is prevented from carrying out its statutory functions properly, anarchy becomes the order of the day.
Let me reiterate that it is the judiciary which interprets the laws made by the legislature, and regulates the actions and activities of the executive arm of government, and the things the masses do, to ascertain if they ar legal, constitutional or otherwise.
According to the immediate past Chief Judge of Rivers State, Hon. Justice Daisy Wotube Okocha, without the judiciary the legislature might make laws that are incapable of explication and the executive might be uncontrollable: self-help will be the order and a way to resolve dispute.
In order for society not to be chaotic the judiciary system need to be strengthened in such a way that it can conveniently give quick and proper justice in a manner that litigants will see that justice is not only done, but seen to be done.
Improved justice delivery system in the polity is so important that so many renowned personalities and authorities have had cause to emphasise on the need to always have quick justice dispensation mechanisms in place in the nation.
For instance, Kola S. Okeaya (SAN), in an address on behalf of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN), during the 2015/2016 legal year opening ceremony at the Supreme Court, Abuja, said that the machinery of justice administration should be given greater attention; otherwise all efforts made at improving legal practice will be ineffectual. He said that the executive, through the Ministry of Justice, should ensure that other apparatuses of justice administration like the Police and Prisons are made to discharge their responsibilities.
Sharing similar sentiment in an article in the maiden edition of “The Adjudicator,” a publication of Rivers State Judiciary, the Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice of the State, Emmanuel Chinwenwo Aguma (SAN) said “The time has come for us collectively as stakeholders and key players in the administration of justice to kick against processes that throw up and enthrone deviants who will ultimately be empowered to arbitrarily abuse their offices by desperately seeking means and ways to influence the judiciary both at the federal and state levels.”
He went further to state that the institutional structures which support and compliment the role ft he judiciary in the administration of justice must be strengthened in order to ensure efficient justice delivery in Nigeria. Such institutions according to him, include the Nigerian Police, the Nigerian Prisons, The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, to mention but a few.
These views underscores the need for quick dispensation of justice. This can only be possible with an independent judiciary working in synergy with other relevant agencies and bodies, who are also independent and free from all manners and forms of interference.
But unfortunately, in recent times the kind of pronouncements and judgments that courts in Nigeria issue on the same matters raise the question of where the hope of the common man hangs. Instances of such controversial judgments abound.
In as much as litigants may be ready and willing to accept and obey court orders and rulings, it really becomes unclear and confusing when courts give contrary and varying orders and judgements that negate those earlier given on same matter. This was the excuse the Nigerian Police gave in barricading the Port Harcourt Civic Centre so that the National Convention of Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) scheduled for that venue could no longer hold; declaring that they didn’t know which of the court orders to obey. It may be true that the police were playing out a script as insinuated in some quarters, yet the excuse given based on the double-standard judgement seem tenable. This ought not to be so.
The judiciary, and all the institutional structures which complement it in the dispensation of justice, should not carry out actions or should not be seen to act in ways that will erode the people’s confidence in the temple of justice. These orders and counter-orders from competent courts of same and varying jurisdiction over same matters demean the judiciary.
The earlier the relevant authorities and stakeholders do something about this situation, the better it will be for the society’s development and the people’s well-being. In this regard, the call by the immediate past Chief Judge of Nigeria, Justice Mahmud Mohammad, in his address to mark the opening of the 2016/2017 legal year in Abuja that the Nigeria Judicial Commission is investigating judges delivering conflicting judgements on some issues based on petitions received by the council is highly welcome.
Aside the issue of conflicting verdicts and pronouncements which delay justice and put litigants into great confusion, there are other reasons why justice is unduly delayed in our polity. This delay has led to the congestion of our prisons.
The 56th Annual General Conference of Nigerian Bar Association aged “Gardencity 2016”, has come and gone. At the conference, immediate past National President of the Association, Augustine Alegeh (SAN), said that they were gathered to push forward the frontiers of the laws, advance the course of administration of justice, reaffirm their collective commitment to the enforcement of rule of law in the country among other reasons.
The lawyers have all gathered to brainstorm over national and international issues of great relevance; they have indeed deliberated and fraternized. However, the nation now awaits the dividends of their convergence, especially in the advancement of the course of Justice Dispensation and Administration.
Oruigoni is the press/information Office, Rivers State Ministry of Justice
From all indications, Nigeria possesses enough human and material resources to become a true economic powerhouse in Africa. According to the National Population Commission (NPC, 2023), the country’s population has grown steadily within the last decade, presently standing at about 220 million people—mostly young, vibrant, and innovative. Nigeria also remains the sixth-largest oil producer in the world, with enormous reserves of gas, fertile agricultural land, and human capital.
Yet, despite this enormous potential, the country continues to grapple with underdevelopment, poverty, unemployment, and insecurity. Recent data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS, 2023) show that about 129 million Nigerians currently live below the poverty line. Most families can no longer afford basic necessities, even as the government continues to project a rosy economic picture.
The Subsidy Question
The removal of fuel subsidy in 2023 by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has been one of the most controversial policy decisions in Nigeria’s recent history. According to the president, subsidy removal was designed to reduce fiscal burden, unify the foreign exchange rate, attract investment, curb inflation, and discourage excessive government borrowing.
While these objectives are theoretically sound, the reality for ordinary Nigerians has been severe hardship. Fuel prices more than tripled, transportation costs surged, and food inflation—already high—rose above 30% (NBS, 2023). The World Bank (2023) estimates that an additional 7.1 million Nigerians were pushed into poverty after subsidy removal.
A Critical Economic View
As an economist, I argue that the problem was not subsidy removal itself—which was inevitable—but the timing, sequencing, and structural gaps in Nigeria’s implementation.
- Structural Miscalculation
Nigeria’s four state-owned refineries remain nonfunctional. By removing subsidies without local refining capacity, the government exposed the economy to import-price pass-through effects—where global oil price shocks translate directly into domestic inflation. This was not just a timing issue but a fundamental policy miscalculation.
- Neglect of Social Safety Nets
Countries like Indonesia (2005) and Ghana (2005) removed subsidies successfully only after introducing cash transfers, transport vouchers, and food subsidies for the poor (World Bank, 2005). Nigeria, however, implemented removal abruptly, shifting the fiscal burden directly onto households without protection.
- Failure to Secure Food and Energy Alternatives
Fuel subsidy removal amplified existing weaknesses in agriculture and energy. Instead of sequencing reforms, government left Nigerians without refinery capacity, renewable energy alternatives, or mechanized agricultural productivity—all of which could have cushioned the shock.
Political and Public Concerns
Prominent leaders have echoed these concerns. Mr. Peter Obi, the Labour Party’s 2023 presidential candidate, described the subsidy removal as “good but wrongly timed.” Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party also faulted the government’s hasty approach. Human rights activists like Obodoekwe Stive stressed that refineries should have been made functional first, to reduce the suffering of citizens.
This is not just political rhetoric—it reflects a widespread economic reality. When inflation climbs above 30%, when purchasing power collapses, and when households cannot meet basic needs, the promise of reform becomes overshadowed by social pain.
Broader Implications
The consequences of this policy are multidimensional:
- Inflationary Pressures – Food inflation above 30% has made nutrition unaffordable for many households.
- Rising Poverty – 7.1 million Nigerians have been newly pushed into poverty (World Bank, 2023).
- Middle-Class Erosion – Rising transport, rent, and healthcare costs are squeezing household incomes.
- Debt Concerns – Despite promises, government borrowing has continued, raising sustainability questions.
- Public Distrust – When government promises savings but citizens feel only pain, trust in leadership erodes.
In effect, subsidy removal without structural readiness has widened inequality and eroded social stability.
Missed Opportunities
Nigeria’s leaders had the chance to approach subsidy removal differently:
- Refinery Rehabilitation – Ensuring local refining to reduce exposure to global oil price shocks.
- Renewable Energy Investment – Diversifying energy through solar, hydro, and wind to reduce reliance on imported petroleum.
- Agricultural Productivity – Mechanization, irrigation, and smallholder financing could have boosted food supply and stabilized prices.
- Social Safety Nets – Conditional cash transfers, food vouchers, and transport subsidies could have protected the most vulnerable.
Instead, reform came abruptly, leaving citizens to absorb all the pain while waiting for theoretical long-term benefits.
Conclusion: Reform With a Human Face
Fuel subsidy removal was inevitable, but Nigeria’s approach has worsened hardship for millions. True reform must go beyond fiscal savings to protect citizens.
Economic policy is not judged only by its efficiency but by its humanity. A well-sequenced reform could have balanced fiscal responsibility with equity, ensuring that ordinary Nigerians were not crushed under the weight of sudden change.
Nigeria has the resources, population, and resilience to lead Africa’s economy. But leadership requires foresight. It requires policies that are inclusive, humane, and strategically sequenced.
Reform without equity is displacement of poverty, not development. If Nigeria truly seeks progress, its policies must wear a human face.
References
- National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). (2023). Poverty and Inequality Report. Abuja.
- National Population Commission (NPC). (2023). Population Estimates. Abuja.
- World Bank. (2023). Nigeria Development Update. Washington, DC.
- World Bank. (2005). Fuel Subsidy Reforms: Lessons from Indonesia and Ghana. Washington, DC.
- OPEC. (2023). Annual Statistical Bulletin. Vienna.
By: Amarachi Amaugo