Editorial
S’Court: Averting Constitutional Crisis
The Supreme Court Bench has failed to fill all of its vacant seats despite the repeated appeals made by retired justices and lawyers. As a consequence, the court currently does not have its complete complement of 21 justices, leading to an excessive workload on the existing jurists who are already overwhelmed with a significant number of cases. This has constituted a delay in the quick dispensation of justice.
The Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Olukayode Ariwoola, expressed his concern regarding the decreasing number of justices on the apex court bench and the resulting burden it has placed on their workload. During a valedictory ceremony for retired Supreme Court Justice Abdu Aboki on September 15, 2022, Ariwoola, who was then serving in an acting capacity, highlighted that the departure of one justice had led to an increased workload for the remaining jurists.
With the deaths of Justice Sylvester Nwali Ngwuta and Justice Centus Nweze as well as recent retirements of Justices Musa Muhammad Dattijo and Adamu Augie, the Supreme Court is now faced with a more precarious challenge. The number of justices has dwindled to just 10, the lowest it has ever been in contemporary history. Dattijo restated this fact in his valedictory speech in Abuja, last Friday, which has shaken the very foundations of the apex court in many ramifications. This development raises concerns among Nigerians who have long hoped for a swift dispensation of justice.
The authorities must make efforts to get on board enough Justices to boost their rank and avert a constitutional crisis.
Interestingly, over the past two decades, the Supreme Court has not been able to reach its full complement of 21 justices. This is noteworthy considering the continuously growing list of cases, partly due to the contentious and litigious nature of our democratic system. The court experienced a critical milestone in January 2017 when Uwani Abba-Aji was sworn in, bringing the total number of justices to 17. However, this period of success was short-lived.
Approximately two years later, former President Muhammadu Buhari acted upon a court order that sparked controversy and led to the suspension of the Chief Justice of Nigeria at the time, Walter Onnoghen. Consequently, Onnoghen was ultimately removed from his position by the National Judicial Council. In addition, the retirements of Kumai Akaahs and Sidi Bage further diminished the number of justices to 14.
Efforts to increase the number of Supreme Court justices, both before and after the mentioned period, have been unsuccessful in achieving the desired results. Currently, the vacant positions remain unfilled. In June 2019, former President Muhammadu Buhari requested the immediate past CJN, Tanko Muhammad, to commence the process of appointing an additional five Justices to complete the total of 21 Justices. However, despite several years passing since this directive was given, it has yet to be implemented.
At the moment, the chances of litigants receiving quick justice are very low. Court appeals can drag on for years, even decades, leading to some litigants passing on before their cases are resolved.
Onnoghen had alerted the nation that the court’s schedule was booked until 2021 with appeals, reiterating this in January 2019. For example, the Supreme Court rejected 14 pre-election suits in January 2019, before the main elections, citing Section 285 of the Constitution. The 2019 pre-election and general election cases, which had a time-sensitive nature, gave rise to a backlog of cases.
Consequently, there were delays in non-election litigations and a substantial burden placed on the judges, allowing them very little time for personal matters and their families. In contrast, in other jurisdictions, their highest courts are actively making noteworthy contributions to the field of jurisprudence.
Certainly, the workload of the Supreme Court has indeed increased significantly over the years, resulting in an immense burden. In light of this, we propose the implementation of a decentralised apex court structure. This entails establishing divisions within the Supreme Court dedicated to each state or the nation’s six geopolitical zones, akin to the structure observed in the Court of Appeals. The purpose of this arrangement is to foster a robust federal structure, ensuring that matters related to the states or the interpretation and application of state laws are addressed at the respective state Supreme Court level.
Few interpretations of Constitution and policy cases, as well as local matters like land disputes and commercial transactions, will reach the Supreme Court in Abuja.
Establishing court divisions in each state or geopolitical zone would ensure that such local cases are handled at the highest court within the state, while only a select few cases of national significance or trans-border commerce would be escalated to the apex court, thereby reducing the workload of the Supreme Court. A filtration system should be established to determine the kind of cases to be heard by the highest court.
In 1976, the Court of Appeal had three divisions in Lagos, Enugu, and Kaduna. However, to reduce travel distance, and cost, and enhance efficiency, there are now 19 divisions. It is noteworthy that while the Court of Appeal is expanding, the Supreme Court remains unchanged. Therefore, President Bola Tinubu should prioritise reforms that facilitate the swift promotion of Court of Appeal justices to the Supreme Court.
Considering the possibility of other Justices retiring soon, it would be prudent for the President to formally request the Chief Justice of Nigeria for additional nominees. This would help strengthen the numerical capacity of the court to a satisfactory level in the immediate future. As a more lasting solution, we propose the revision of the Constitution to limit the President’s authority in appointing Supreme Court Justices. Instead, a neutral entity should be entrusted with this responsibility.
Having 21 justices for Nigeria’s apex court may be appropriate. The United States Supreme Court has nine justices, while the United Kingdom and Canada have 12 and nine, respectively. In the US, around 7,000 to 8,000 new cases are filed each term. Nigeria’s challenge lies in using technology to enhance justice administration and optimise constitutional arrangements.
When Rivers State Governor, Sir Siminalayi Fubara, received the Board and Management of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), led by its Chairman, Senator Adeyeye Adedayo Clement, his message was unmistakable: Rivers’ seaports remain underutilised, and Nigeria is poorer for it. The governor’s lament was a sad reminder of how neglect and centralisation continue to choke the nation’s economic arteries.
The governor, in his remarks at Government House, Port Harcourt, expressed concern that the twin seaports — the NPA in Port Harcourt and the Onne Seaport — have not been operating at their full potential. He underscored that seaports are vital engines of national development, pointing out that no prosperous nation thrives without efficient ports and airports. His position aligns with global realities that maritime trade remains the backbone of industrial expansion and international commerce.
Indeed, the case of Rivers State is peculiar. It hosts two major ports strategically located along the Bonny River axis, yet cargo throughput has remained dismally low compared to Lagos. According to NPA’s 2023 statistics, Lagos ports (Apapa and Tin Can Island) handled over 75 per cent of Nigeria’s container traffic, while Onne managed less than 10 per cent. Such a lopsided distribution is neither efficient nor sustainable.
Governor Fubara rightly observed that the full capacity operation of Onne Port would be transformative. The area’s vast land mass and industrial potential make it ideal for ancillary businesses — warehousing, logistics, ship repair, and manufacturing. A revitalised Onne would attract investors, create jobs, and stimulate economic growth, not only in Rivers State but across the Niger Delta.
The multiplier effect cannot be overstated. The port’s expansion would boost clearing and forwarding services, strengthen local transport networks, and revitalise the moribund manufacturing sector. It would also expand opportunities for youth employment — a pressing concern in a state where unemployment reportedly hovers around 32 per cent, according to the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS).
Yet, the challenge lies not in capacity but in policy. For years, Nigeria’s maritime economy has been suffocated by excessive centralisation. Successive governments have prioritised Lagos at the expense of other viable ports, creating a traffic nightmare and logistical bottlenecks that cost importers and exporters billions annually. The governor’s call, therefore, is a plea for fairness and pragmatism.
Making Lagos the exclusive maritime gateway is counter productive. Congestion at Tin Can Island and Apapa has become legendary — ships often wait weeks to berth, while truck queues stretch for kilometres. The result is avoidable demurrage, product delays, and business frustration. A more decentralised port system would spread economic opportunities and reduce the burden on Lagos’ overstretched infrastructure.
Importers continue to face severe difficulties clearing goods in Lagos, with bureaucratic delays and poor road networks compounding their woes. The World Bank’s Doing Business Report estimates that Nigerian ports experience average clearance times of 20 days — compared to just 5 days in neighbouring Ghana. Such inefficiency undermines competitiveness and discourages foreign investment.
Worse still, goods transported from Lagos to other regions are often lost to accidents or criminal attacks along the nation’s perilous highways. Reports from the Federal Road Safety Corps indicate that over 5,000 road crashes involving heavy-duty trucks occurred in 2023, many en route from Lagos. By contrast, activating seaports in Rivers, Warri, and Calabar would shorten cargo routes and save lives.
The economic rationale is clear: making all seaports operational will create jobs, enhance trade efficiency, and boost national revenue. It will also help diversify economic activity away from the overburdened South West, spreading prosperity more evenly across the federation.
Decentralisation is both an economic strategy and an act of national renewal. When Onne, Warri, and Calabar ports operate optimally, hinterland states benefit through increased trade and infrastructure development. The federal purse, too, gains through taxes, duties, and improved productivity.
Tin Can Island, already bursting at the seams, exemplifies the perils of over-centralisation. Ships face berthing delays, containers stack up, and port users lose valuable hours navigating chaos. The result is higher operational costs and lower competitiveness. Allowing states like Rivers to fully harness their maritime assets would reverse this trend.
Compelling all importers to use Lagos ports is an anachronistic policy that stifles innovation and local enterprise. Nigeria cannot achieve its industrial ambitions by chaining its logistics system to one congested city. The path to prosperity lies in empowering every state to develop and utilise its natural advantages — and for Rivers, that means functional seaports.
Fubara’s call should not go unheeded. The Federal Government must embrace decentralisation as a strategic necessity for national growth. Making Rivers’ seaports work is not just about reviving dormant infrastructure; it is about unlocking the full maritime potential of a nation yearning for balance, productivity, and shared prosperity.
