Editorial

Lamentations Of The CJN

Published

6 years ago

February 4, 2020

With the retirement of Justice Amiru Sanusi from the Supreme Court bench yesterday after attaining the mandatory 70 years, the number of Justices in the apex court has dropped from 14 to 13. This development comes on the heels of repeated calls and complaints by the Chief Justice of Nigeria, (CJN), Justice Tanko Muhammad, that he and his colleagues in the highest court are overworked.
Only recently were such calls repeated by the CJN when he sought the intervention of the National Assembly in the working conditions of Supreme Court Justices and asked for the amendment of the appellate jurisdiction of the Court in the 1999 Constitution (as amended) to prevent all manner of appeal cases from terminating at the apex court.
The Chief Justice claimed that the number of cases pending before the Supreme Court was overwhelming and taking its tolls on the health of the Justices. According to him, the amendment had become expedient for timely dispensation of justice and to reduce the mental stress the heavy burden of pending appeals was weighing on the Justices.
The 1999 Constitution (as amended) provides for 21 Justices as a full complement of the apex court bench, a status the court has never attained. We recall that the number of Justices of the Supreme Court reached 17 on January 18, 2019, when the then CJN, Justice Walter Onnoghen (rtd), swore in Justice Uwani Abba-Aji to the apex court bench.
In June 2019, President Muhammadu Buhari requested the CJN to initiate the process of appointing additional five Justices to the apex court to make the full complement of the constitutionally-provided 21 Justices. But the President has failed to respond to a list of four recommended Justices submitted to him since October 2019.
Nearly every Chief Justice of Nigeria had at one time or the other deprecated the excess workload in the Supreme Court. It was in consideration of this challenge that the Electoral Act initially made the Court of Appeal the final court for all election matters in the country except presidential election petition which terminates at the Supreme Court.
However, following conflicting Appeal Court judgments on gubernatorial election petition cases, the National Assembly, in the 2010 amendment of the Electoral Act, made the apex court the final destination for all governorship election matters in the country. But the amendment expanded the burden of the Supreme Court Justices.
We appreciate the ugly predicament judges of the apex court face and deeply sympathise with them for the arduous task they have to bear. However, we think that rather than lament publicly, the CJN should approach the National Judicial Council (NJC) which oversees the affairs of judges in the country for appropriate legislative interventions.
The Tide believes that a far-reaching reform of the Supreme Court is long overdue. So, to be included in such a change should be a timeline for the determination of all cases in court regardless of the tier. This will ensure a speedy dispensation of justice in the nation’s judicial system.
The slow pace of justice delivery and accumulation of pending cases are regrettable and frustrating. If the regular saying that “justice delayed is justice denied” is anything to go by, then, we have a plethora of denied justice in our land. Some matters remain up to 10 years or more before their adjudication at the Supreme Court.
It is worrying that despite complaints from the CJN and stakeholders in the judiciary of the scanty number of judges, the Supreme Court bench is yet to have its full complement of justices. We demand that the President acts on the recommendation of NJC on the elevation of some justices from the Court of Appeal to the apex court.
We are in sync with the CJN to limit the number of cases the apex court can adjudicate. Allowing almost all cases to get to the Supreme Court without limitations constitutes a burden on the nation’s legal system, particularly considering that even in advanced democracies like the United States of America (USA) and Canada, only constitutional and important matters get to the Supreme Court.
With a population of about 340 million people, the USA, for instance, has only one federal Supreme Court comprising nine members with several others in the states to handle matters arising from state laws. Similarly, Canada, a complex country of over 35 million with English and French speaking people residing on a land mass 10 times bigger than Nigeria, has a national Supreme Court and others in the provinces.
We recommend that the US and Canadian models be adopted and made workable in Nigeria. The Supreme Court has to be unbundled and established in each of the six geo-political zones to hear sundry matters, while the apex court in Abuja will be concerned with constitutional issues. In contrast, the current membership of the court should be increased from the constitutionally-provided 21 members to accommodate a few more panels.
Nigeria’s justice system is beset with many determinants. The apex court in particular has been congested with frivolous and scandalous cases. Any wonder the CJN had once claimed that the case diary of the court had been filled till 2022 following over 500 pending cases. The Supreme Court should be a policy court to focus mainly on constitutional issues while most of the works should be done at the lower courts.

Editorial

No To Political Office Holders’ Salary Hike

Published

1 day ago

September 22, 2025

Uchechukwu Okwum

Nigeria’s Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) has unveiled a gratuitous proposal to increase the salaries of political and public office holders in the country. This plan seeks to fatten the pay packets of the president, vice-president, governors, deputy governors, and members of the National and State Assemblies. At a time when the nation is struggling to steady its economy, the suggestion that political leaders should be rewarded with more money is not only misplaced but insulting to the sensibilities of the ordinary Nigerian.

What makes the proposal even more opprobrious is the dire economic condition under which citizens currently live. The cost of living crisis has worsened, inflation has eroded the purchasing power of workers, and the naira continues to tumble against foreign currencies. The majority of Nigerians are living hand to mouth, with many unable to afford basic foodstuffs, medical care, and education. Against this backdrop, political office holders, who already enjoy obscene allowances, perks, and privileges, should not even contemplate a salary increase.

It is, therefore, not surprising that the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has stepped in to challenge this development. SERAP has filed a lawsuit against the RMAFC to halt the implementation of this salary increment. This resolute move represents a voice of reason and accountability at a time when public anger against political insensitivity is palpable. The group is rightly insisting that the law must serve as a bulwark against impunity.

According to a statement issued by SERAP’s Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, the commission has been dragged before the Federal High Court in Abuja. Although a hearing date remains unconfirmed, the momentous step of seeking judicial redress reflects a determination to hold those in power accountable. SERAP has once again positioned itself as a guardian of public interest by challenging an elite-centric policy.

The case, registered as suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1834/2025, specifically asks the court to determine “whether RMAFC’s proposed salary hike for the president, vice-president, governors and their deputies, and lawmakers in Nigeria is not unlawful, unconstitutional and inconsistent with the rule of law.” This formidable question goes to the very heart of democratic governance: can those entrusted with public resources decide their own pay rises without violating the constitution and moral order?

In its pleadings, SERAP argues that the proposed hike runs foul of both the 1999 Nigerian Constitution and the RMAFC Act. By seeking a judicial declaration that such a move is unlawful, unconstitutional, and inconsistent with the rule of law, the group has placed a spotlight on the tension between self-serving leadership and constitutionalism. To trivialise such an issue would be harum-scarum, for the constitution remains the supreme authority guiding governance.

We wholeheartedly commend SERAP for standing firm, while we roundly condemn RMAFC’s selfish proposal. Political office should never be an avenue for financial aggrandisement. Since our leaders often pontificate sacrifice to citizens, urging them to tighten their belts in the face of economic turbulence, the same leaders must embody sacrifice themselves. Anything short of this amounts to double standards and betrayal of trust.

The Nigerian economy is not buoyant enough to shoulder the additional cost of a salary increase for political leaders. Already, lawmakers and executives enjoy allowances that are grossly disproportionate to the national average income. These earnings are sufficient not only for their needs but also their unchecked greed. To even consider further increments under present circumstances is egregious, a slap in the face of ordinary workers whose minimum wage remains grossly insufficient.

Resources earmarked for such frivolities should instead be channelled towards alleviating the suffering of citizens and improving the nation’s productive capacity. According to United Nations statistics, about 62.9 per cent of Nigerians were living in multidimensional poverty in 2021, compared to 53.7 per cent in 2017. Similarly, nearly 30.9 per cent of the population lives below the international poverty line of US$2.15 per day. These figures paint a stark picture: Nigeria is a poor country by all measurable standards, and any extra naira diverted to elite pockets deepens this misery.

Besides, the timing of this proposal could not be more inappropriate. At a period when unemployment is soaring, inflation is crippling households, and insecurity continues to devastate communities, the RMAFC has chosen to pursue elite enrichment. It is widely known that Nigeria’s economy is in a parlous state, and public resources should be conserved and wisely invested. Political leaders must show prudence, not profligacy.

Another critical dimension is the national debt profile. According to the Debt Management Office, Nigeria’s total public debt as of March 2025 stood at a staggering N149.39 trillion. External debt obligations also remain heavy, with about US$43 billion outstanding by September 2024. In such a climate of debt-servicing and borrowing to fund budgets, it is irresponsible for political leaders to even table the idea of inflating their salaries further. Debt repayment, not self-reward, should occupy their minds.

This ignoble proposal is insensitive, unnecessary, and profoundly reckless. It should be discarded without further delay. Public office is a trust, not an entitlement to wealth accumulation. Nigerians deserve leaders who will share in their suffering, lead by example, and prioritise the common good over self-indulgence. Anything less represents betrayal of the social contract and undermines the fragile democracy we are striving to build.

Editorial

No To Political Office Holders’ Salary Hike

Published

1 day ago

September 22, 2025

The Tide

Editorial

Rivers’ Retirees: Matters Arising

Published

2 weeks ago

September 8, 2025

The Tide

The Rivers State Government deserves commendation for the manner in which it conducted the last biometric exercise for pensioners in the state. For the first time in many years, the verification process was not only efficient but also humane, a development that has brought relief to a category of citizens that often bears the brunt of neglect.

Unlike previous verification exercises that left pensioners exhausted and unattended, the latest exercise set a refreshing precedent. Retirees were given proper and sumptuous meals, and in addition, the government paid the sum of N10,000 into their accounts to cushion their transportation costs. Such gestures go a long way in demonstrating that those who had laboured for the state are not forgotten in their twilight years.

The measure was particularly necessary given that some pensioners had to travel long distances to reach their verification centres. For elderly men and women, such journeys come with physical and financial strain. By recognising these realities and easing the burden, the government has shown that pensioners deserve dignity, not disdain.

Beyond this laudable act of consideration, the authorities must reflect on the very structure of pension verification. The era of compelling retirees to be physically present for routine verification should be reconsidered. With digital tools and innovation, the government can adopt systems that capture and confirm data without the stress of physical assembly. This is crucial for pensioners residing in other states or even abroad.

While we acknowledge the importance of verification in cleaning up pension records, we cannot ignore the darker side of the matter. It is regrettable that some allowances continue to be paid to deceased pensioners, with relatives fraudulently collecting the funds. The latest biometrics, thankfully, exposed some of these sharp practices. The exercise, therefore, is not only about order but also about justice.

We urge families of deceased pensioners to be patriotic enough to inform the government of the deaths of their loved ones. It is deeply shameful that in some instances, individuals attempted to impersonate late pensioners during the biometrics. Such behaviour undermines the spirit of honesty and deprives genuine retirees of their due entitlements.

The exercise also revealed another important area of concern: the health of pensioners. It is reassuring to learn that the state government has reportedly promised to take over the medical treatment of some retirees who arrived for the biometrics in critical condition. This is a step in the right direction. Elderly citizens, after years of service, should have access to special health care facilities in the state. Setting aside hospitals or designated centres for the aged is not just desirable but necessary.

While pension payments in Rivers State have remained consistent, attention must now be directed towards gratuities. Senior citizens deserve to receive their retirement benefits without the bureaucratic hitches that have often marred the process. After years of loyal service, nothing is more demoralising than to see retirees languish for want of their gratuities. Every worker, as Scripture reminds us, is worthy of his wage.

Retirement, in any civilised society, should not be reduced to a sentence of suffering. In dealing with pensioners, government must consistently wear a human face. The humane manner displayed during this verification exercise should not be a one-off. It must become the norm in all dealings with retirees. Measures must continually be put in place to ensure that they do not feel abandoned by the state they served.

One welcome innovation has already been introduced. The Sole Administrator of Rivers State, Vice Admiral (Rtd) Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas, has altered the method of gratuity payment. Pensioners now receive their monies directly into their bank accounts, eliminating the cheque-based system that for years served as fertile ground for corruption. This reform is both pragmatic and forward-looking. Similarly, the implementation of the N32,000 pension harmonisation is also commendable.

Direct payments gratuities ensure transparency and drastically reduce the possibility of diversion of funds. More importantly, they restore confidence in the system and assure pensioners that their entitlements will reach them without interference. In this way, the government has not only safeguarded the process but also upheld the principle of accountability.

Seamless gratuity payment has a ripple effect on the workforce as a whole. When workers are confident that retirement will not plunge them into hardship, the temptation to falsify age in order to remain in service is eliminated. Such reforms, therefore, enhance efficiency, honesty, and productivity in the public service.

In sum, the Rivers State Government has struck a refreshing chord in its handling of pension verification. It has shown empathy, innovation, and accountability. However, the momentum must be sustained, and the focus must shift towards modernising verification methods and prioritising retirees’ welfare in health, gratuity, and dignity.

When retirees are treated with compassion and fairness, the message to those still in service is clear: faithful service to the state will not go unrewarded. The humane verification exercise, though a single event, offers a hopeful glimpse of what governance can look like when people, especially the elderly, are placed at the heart of policy.