By: Onozure Dania |
Bribery prevalence among prosecutors in Nigeria has risen to 67 per cent, while 52 per cent of judges have been linked to bribery, with both figures more than doubling between 2019 and 2023, according to a new report by the Platform to Protect Whistleblowers in Africa (PPLAAF).
The report also revealed that 11 out of 124 judges interviewed in a 2020 survey by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) reported receiving bribes totalling N3.7bn over two years.
Titled Judicial Corruption in Nigeria: Causes and Consequences, the report examined how bribery, political interference, external pressure and manipulation of judicial procedures undermine the administration of justice.
The findings, drawn from surveys conducted by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), identified prosecutors as having the highest bribery prevalence among the public officials surveyed.
The report also cited findings by Nigeria’s Auditor-General that N4.8bn was misappropriated or unaccounted for by federal courts between 2012 and 2015.
It warned that judicial corruption was weakening efforts to prosecute politically exposed persons, recover unexplained wealth and strengthen accountability, while creating a justice system in which wealthy litigants could secure favourable treatment at the expense of ordinary Nigerians.
Speaking during the virtual launch of the report, governance and anti-corruption researcher Matthew Page urged investigative journalists to examine the unexplained wealth of judges, particularly senior judicial officers, to uncover possible corruption.
Page said journalists should investigate judges whose properties, foreign assets and lifestyles appeared inconsistent with their legitimate earnings.
He explained that public officials’ career histories and income records could help establish whether their wealth was beyond their known sources of income.
The report further identified procedural irregularities, prolonged delays and preferential treatment in high-profile cases as practices undermining anti-corruption prosecutions.
It cited the cases of former governors Orji Uzor Kalu, Chimaroke Nnamani and Willie Obiano, alongside former pension reform official Abdulrasheed Maina, as examples of how judicial dysfunction and suspected corrupt interference could weaken accountability.
In Kalu’s case, the report recalled that the Supreme Court nullified his conviction in 2020 on a technical ground following a 12-year trial.
It noted that six years after the conviction was nullified, Kalu had yet to be retried.
Page also identified weak enforcement of existing laws as a major contributor to delays in Nigeria’s judicial system, particularly in cases involving survivors of sexual and gender-based violence.
He pointed to the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015, which was introduced to accelerate criminal proceedings and prevent unnecessary delays, arguing that its provisions were not being adequately enforced.
According to him, existing legal provisions should be fully implemented before additional solutions are introduced.
On the role of anti-corruption agencies, Page acknowledged that institutions such as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) could sometimes be ineffective or compromised despite their efforts to prosecute politically exposed persons.
He cited the case involving former Rivers State Governor Peter Odili, arguing that the EFCC’s failure to challenge a perpetual injunction within the stipulated period allowed the order to remain in force.
Page described the agency’s inaction as an abuse of discretion, which he termed an “embrace of inertia”.
He also supported proposals for digital or random case assignments to reduce human interference in the judiciary, although he cautioned that heavy court workloads and manipulation of filing dates could undermine the effectiveness of such systems.
The researcher further called for explicit legislation prohibiting government officials from giving judges mansions, sports utility vehicles and other benefits under the guise of judicial welfare.
Meanwhile, PPLAAF Executive Director, Jimmy Kande, said corruption, bribery and undue external pressure continued to undermine the Nigerian judiciary, with serious implications for democracy and the rule of law.
He warned that suspected judicial corruption could prevent high-ranking public officials from being convicted of financial crimes, allowing properties allegedly acquired abroad with unexplained wealth to remain beyond the reach of authorities.
Similarly, Programme Manager of the African Centre for Media and Information Literacy, Godwin Onyeacholem, described judicial corruption as a major threat to human rights and democratic development.
PPLAAF called for comprehensive judicial reforms, including genuine financial independence for the judiciary, stronger independent accountability mechanisms and greater transparency in judicial appointments, budgets, expenditures and contracting.
It also recommended the publication and independent verification of asset declarations by judges and other judicial personnel, sanctions for procedural abuses, and independent vetting of sitting judges and prosecutors under international oversight.
Established in 2017, PPLAAF is a non-governmental organisation that protects whistleblowers, advocates for their rights and engages in strategic litigation when their disclosures affect the general interests of African citizens.
