1

JUDICIAL REFORM IN THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT

OF NIGERIA

BEING A PAPER PRESENTED BY HON. JUSTICE I. N.

AUTA (OFR)

CHIEF JUDGE

FEDERAL HIGH COURT OF NIGERIA

BAR- BENCH FORUMN SESSION AT THE 2015

ANNUAL GENERAL CONFERENCE OF THE NIGERIAN

BAR ASSOCIATION

ON 25TH AUGUST 2015

2

Introduction I believe judicial reform generally is an act that is of

interest to everybody in the legal and judicial system.

This is so because it is widely accepted that if the judiciary

fails there is no hope for the common man, as it is more

popularly said that “judiciary is the last hope of the

common man”. What then is reform? To reform according

to the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary is to “make

changes in something or practice, especially an institution

in order to improve it”. Judicial reform therefore means

those changes that are made to the already existing

judicial system in order to improve. As I have said earlier

because of the importance of the judicial system to the

common man, it is important that the judiciary more than

any arm of government pays attention to reforms. You

3

can all agree with me that the challenges of justice

delivery in the 21st Century are daunting and huge. The

pace at which the world is moving is so fast and the

judiciary has to keep up with it in order to be able to

dispense justice effectively and efficiently. This is why

there has to be constant reforms (changes) and

improvement in the judicial process to be able to keep up

with the 21st Century world now referred to as a global

village.

This paper is basically about such judicial reforms in the

Federal High Court of Nigeria. The Federal High Court is a

unique court that plays an indispensable judicial role in

our collective quest for the effective and timely

dispensation of justice. The jurisdiction of the Court is

4

unique and enviable which puts it in a position that is

pertinent to the growth of our ever evolving democracy

and jurisprudence.

In this short paper, I will go through a brief history of the

Federal High Court, focus on the challenges which the

Court has encountered that led to reforms or need for

reforms, a look at some of the few reforms and I will

conclude with some suggestions on the way forward.

Part I - History of the Federal High Court

The Federal Revenue Court (as the Federal High Court

was then called) was established by the Federal Revenue

Act 1973 (1973 No. 13). The Court was renamed the

“Federal High Court” by Section 230 (2) of the 1979

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. From its

inception, controversy over its jurisdiction dogged the

Court. However, such controversy was finally settled with

5

the enactment of the Federal High Court (Amendment

Decree 1991 No. 60) which conferred exclusive jurisdiction

on the Court in relation to the subject-matter covered by

that Act. The Federal High Court jurisdiction as enshrined

in Section 251 (a) to (s) of the 1999 Constitution of the

Federal Republic of Nigeria (As Amended) covers Civil

Causes and Matters and Criminal matters related to the

jurisdiction. Such as Aviation, Admiralty, Customs and

Excise duty, Drugs, Revenue and many more before the

Court. The Federal High Court has recorded impressive

growth since its inception in 1973. From the pioneering

Five Judges, the Court now has over fifty Judges with

Judicial Divisions spread across the Country.

Part II - Challenges of the Court

The Federal High Court as part of the judiciary has her fair

share of the many challenges of the judiciary in this

country. I will only highlight a few of them.

6

Personally I am of the opinion that delay in the

dispensation of Justice is perhaps the most worrisome

challenge facing the judiciary. I believe once the citizens

lack the belief in the judicial system, because they believe

the justice if delivered will be delayed; nobody will take

their grievances to Court. The saying that “justice delayed

is justice denied” is a truism. It is no longer strange to

hear most Nigerians say, to seek redress in our courts is a

waste of time, because such relief may not come during

your life time. A lot of factors contribute to this delay,

take for instance some divisions of Federal High Court

have over 10,000 case files with less than 10 Judges; only

supernatural human beings will be able to clear their

dockets. We cannot overlook the attitude of the major

players which are the lawyers, litigants and judicial

7

officers. Like I have said in various fora before this, the

main cause of delay in justice delivery in this country is

our lawyers. I know a lot of you here will not be happy

hearing this but it is the truth. If two lawyers on opposing

sides are determined to fast-track a case no manner of

obstacle can delay the case. Even the counsel can put the

Judge on his toes if they both want the case to move

forward. What we see however is counsel filing irrelevant

and unnecessary motions to delay cases and the Judge

must hear them and rule in order to satisfy the principle of

fair hearing, thereby occasioning delay in the cases. One

would assume that they take so much glory in how long

the case lasts in court not minding their clients

impecunious financial disposition and the damage to our

jurisprudence. We need to change the mindset of our

8

lawyers from devising strategies to delay cases such as

seeking unnecessary adjournments for flimsy reasons. We

have to also admit sadly that some judicial officers are

lazy and this causes a lot of delay. Coupled with this is

the fact that our courts are ill-equipped and lack the basic

necessities such as court reporters, digital reporters and

research assistants. This means the Judge will have to

record in long-hand, research and write Judgments. In

this era of so many cases it is difficult to meet up with

their obvious challenges. Another reason for delay in our

courts is the attitude of some of our Government agencies

that prosecute cases. They often rush to courts with

charges but abandon the cases due to lack of proper

investigation.

9

Another challenge facing the court is the lack of

acceptance of information technology by many. It is

unbelievable the level of unawareness by many of the

relevance of I. T. to the judicial system. In Nigeria we still

find that majority of our courts still use full manual

methods. This is not only archaic but slows down the

wheel of justice delivery. Until we fully accept that I. T.

has come to stay and is the only way to fast-track our

cases we cannot make meaningful progress.

We cannot talk of the problems of the judiciary without

citing the poor funding of this critical arm of government.

Take for instance for the past few years the budget of the

Federal High Court has been reviewed downwardly

consistently. This affects the standard of justice in the

10

courts as it affects the welfare of Judges and their working

condition. It also affects the court from making plans that

will affect the delivery of justice. I think the main problem

of the judiciary is the delay in the dispensation of justice.

This is so because it ultimately affects the faith of the

common man in the judiciary. It is a matter of serious

concern if the general public loses confidence in the courts

as this will result to resorting to jungle justice.

Part III - Some notable reforms

The growth of the Federal High Court has been

remarkable since its inception in 1973. The Court has

seen so many reforms over the years to meet up to the

growth and development of the society; some of the

notable ones are highlighted below.

11

(1) The Federal High Court Civil Procedure Rules (2009)

Order I Rule 4 of the Rules state that “the

fundamental objective of these Rules is, just and

expeditious disposition of cases” the need to make a

new set of Rules was based on the technical

loopholes in the former rules. The Rules had to be

reformed to take care of some of the Orders which

Lawyers can hide under to technically delay cases.

One of such reforms is the front loading of cases as

provided for under Order 3 Rule 3 which made it

mandatory to accompany originating process with all

other documents. The effect of this is that it saves

the time of the Court, it reduces writing for the

Judges and prevents lawyers from springing up

surprises on the other party. The Rules also made

12

provisions for the establishment of communications

and service centre for e-filing in Order 58. As I have

said earlier the world is fast evolving into an ICT

world. The Court must move along or would be left

behind. In line with the provision of that Order the

Federal High Court last year launched its e-filing

department. The implementation is rather slow for

now, but this is due to the budgetary challenges of

the Court, and lack of awareness by counsels and

litigants.

(2) Another notable reform of the Court is the practice

direction on criminal trials relating to offences of

terrorism, kidnapping, trafficking in persons, rape,

corruption and money laundering of 2013.

13

The main objective of the practice direction is simply

put “ to eliminate unnecessary delay and expense for

the parties involved in the court justice system”

criminal matters are usually matters of delicate

circumstances of which time is always of the

paramount importance. It usually involves

infringement on rights, freedom and most ultimately

could involve life, and therefore any sort of delay

could be extremely prejudicial to any of the parties.

Therefore to ensure speedy dispensation of justice

the practice direction provides that parties focus on

maters which are genuinely in issue, minimize the

time spent at trials dealing with interlocutory matters.

Settlement is encouraged and to minimize any undue

adjournments and delays. Ensuring that hearing is

not stalled by unpreparedness of the court or the

parties and that the case is fully ready for trial before

hearing dates are fixed.

14

The practice direction provides that a complainant

should file an accompanying affidavit with a charge

stating that all investigations into a matter had been

concluded and a prima facie case exists. On the date

of first arraignment the prosecutor is compelled to

provide the accused person in court. On preliminary

objections, the court is directed to deliver ruling

within 14 days, and parties are prohibited from

serving applications on another party on a hearing

date. The use of electronic mail and other electronic

means is encouraged by the practice direction to

ensure that all parties are informed of urgent court

and case events.

The above directions in respect of filing a charge will

eradicate unnecessary delays caused by prosecution

who fail to produce accused persons in court, and the

accompanying affidavit will ensure that all

investigations are concluded by the prosecution

before a case is brought before the court.

15

The practice direction also provided specific duties on

the prosecution and defence.

The prosecution is mandated to serve copies of the

statements of evidence and documentary exhibits

upon the defence 7 days before the arraignment and

a written summary of all evidence and further

evidence which is to be relied upon. These provisions

will assist the judge to carry out a prior analysis of

the evidence to be relied upon in the case; parties

can also settle some issues relating to evidence at this

stage, thus saving the time of the court.

The defence is directed to specify in writing the

defence it will raise and the aspect of the

prosecution’s case which he will challenge and those

he agrees with. He must also state in writing which

witnesses he will require for cross examination, and

why.

16

The practice directions were therefore released to

hasten the prompt dispensation of the trial of these

particular sensitive offences.

The practice directions will ensure that it is practically

impossible for any of the parties to delay trial, and

therefore a proper case management can be

achieved.

This in addition to the day to day hearing of cases by

EFCC, ICPC and SSS are all aimed at speedy disposal

of cases.

(3) The Amendment to Order 48 Rule 4 of the Civil

Procedure Rules of the Court is also a notable reform.

It provides for the payment of the fee of N1000.00 for

default in filing processes. I know a lot of people

(especially lawyers) are not happy with this

amendment. The logic behind the amendment is not

to generate money nor is it aimed at punishing

17

counsel or parties. It is aimed at making counsel live

up to their responsibilities to their clients and the

Court. But since the rule came into force, we have

seen a remarkable decrease in the number of late

filings by lawyers. A comparison with other

jurisdiction even shows that the N1,000 is low

compared to other jurisdictions. It is pertinent to note

that some government agencies have applied for

waiver on this issue of penalty for late filing. To grant

this request will definitely defeat the aim of the

enactment. As the main culprit, in this matter of late

filing are government agencies and their parastatals.

However in deserving cases it may be considered

(4) The Nigeria Civil Aviation Procedure Rules of 2013 is

another reform of the Federal High Court. The Rules

18

was drafted to facilitate and accelerate litigation in

Aviation matters. It will interest you to note that

there has never been a civil procedure rules for

aviation in this country. Aviation civil procedure and

processes were initially brought under the Admiralty

Jurisdiction Procedure Rules. Part C of the Admiralty

Jurisdiction Procedure Rules provides for Aviation

Rules; Order 19 Rule 1 provides that:

“Subject to the provisions of these Rules and of all

laws, conventions, treaties, protocols and

understandings on aviation matters as domesticated

in Nigeria and contained in the Federal Civil Aviation

Act, all claims relating to aviation shall be instituted

and prosecuted in accordance with the Federal High

Court (Civil Procedure) Rules”.

19

I considered that it will not do justice to an industry

as important as the Aviation industry if there are no

specific Rules regulating it.

The advantage of the Rules is that it will attract

foreign investors, as they will be aware that their

interests will be protected. A major fear exercised by

investors generally is the fear of prolonged litigation,

which is particularly dreaded in an industry such as

aviation where time means a lot of money. With the

new Rules foreign and indigenous investors are sure

that their cases will be handled expeditiously, as the

provisions of the Rule is now clear and devoid of

ambiguity.

(5) Another reform is the Asset Management Corporation

of Nigeria (AMCON) Practice Direction 2013 which

20

fundamental objective is to enable the Court deal with

AMCON cases quickly and efficiently. One of the

notable reforms is a provision of AMCON track Judge

and AMCON track Court which is designated to hear

AMCON claims exclusively. This will enable quick and

efficient disposal of AMCON cases, which is the sector

that is very important in the growth of our economy.

Part IV - Way Forward

Now that we know that delay in our justice delivery

system is gaining unnecessary ‘popularity’ in the

international community, how do we then minimize

delay? In my opinion, it is the duty of each and every one

of us as stakeholders in the justice delivery system,

namely Lawyers, Judges, Court Staff, Litigants and the

Government to come to the realization that justice delivery

system is fraught with delay and that the system is not

efficient in the discharge of its constitutional duty. Upon

21

this realization, we all should then consciously take active

steps in our different ways to minimize delay.

I have highlighted the problems and challenges of the

Court, as well as some notable reforms aimed at tackling

these challenges. In the near future the following reforms

are on my mind to further reform the Federal High Court.

1. Trial in civil cases should continue from day to day,

unopposed applications should be settled between

counsel and agreed bundle of documents filed

before trial.

2. Counsel should agree two or three adjournment

dates with the court registrar before the Court sits.

The Judge will thereafter adjourn to any of the

dates agreed to avoid the back and forth issue of

agreement on date.

3. In the Federal High Court we are taking a leading

role in computerizing our Courts, in the coming

years with new technological gadgets. We hope to

attach a Court Reporter and a research assistant to

22

all the Judges of the Court. This however is largely

dependent on the availability of funds which has

persuaded me to recommend that the full financial

autonomy of the judiciary be fully implemented. I

implore the NBA to make sure they demand the

financial autonomy of the judiciary to free the

Courts from the grasps of politicians especially in

the states.

4. Rules of Court must be reformed continually to

meet up with Global changes. It is also proposed

that Court should set up a case management

department, that will work with the Court diaries

and counsel to fast track cases. This is the practice

in developed jurisdictions to avoid unnecessary

delays.

5. The Nigeria Bar Association and the Court should

work closely to impose strict sanctions on lawyers

and counsel who abuse Court Processes. More

severe punishments like suspension from practice

or complete debarment of some lawyers that

23

intentionally frustrate the Courts by the filing of

frivolous cases should be constituted. In some

jurisdictions a lawyer that files a case on trial date

or ask for frivolous adjournments will face the

disciplinary committee. This standard must be

borrowed and only the NBA can educate lawyers,

that there is no glory in continually keeping a case

in Court.

6. More training is proposed for Judges and their

support staff, to improve their knowledge and get

the best out of them. This we are doing in the

Federal High Court.

Conclusion

Let me conclude by saying that no amount of reform we

put in place will have any desired effect if we do not

change the mindset of our lawyers. It is therefore up to

the Nigerian Bar Association to continue to train lawyers

24

and more importantly impose sanctions on erring lawyers.

It is only when lawyers are aware that they will be

sanctioned if they employ any delay tactics and not

celebrated amongst colleagues, that we may achieve what

we all desire, which is a stronger contribution of

“Lawyers to National Development” and strong and

enviable judicial system. The Bar and the Bench must

work hand in hand in order to improve the justice delivery

system in Nigeria.

Thank you.