By Henry Ojelu

Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Dr. Charles Mekwunye, has called for sweeping reforms in Nigeria’s judiciary and electoral adjudication system, warning that judicial compromise remains one of the gravest threats to the country’s democracy.

Mekwunye spoke as keynote speaker at the 2026 Law Week of the Nigerian Bar Association Agbor Branch themed, “Future Proofing Nigeria’s Democracy: Credible Elections and the Legal Cross-Roads.”

In a strongly worded presentation, the senior lawyer accused some judicial officers of betraying their oath of office by allegedly aiding the subversion of the electoral will of Nigerians through controversial court decisions.

According to him, there must be consequences for judges and justices found to have deliberately perverted justice in election-related matters.

“There must be consequences for the behaviour of judicial officers who betray their oath and use their enormous powers to pervert the electoral will of the people. The era of impunity must end,” he said.

Mekwunye, however, commended the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, for recent disciplinary measures taken against some judges, including suspensions and retirements, describing the actions as “a step in the right direction.”

He nonetheless insisted that more decisive reforms were needed to restore public confidence in the judiciary.

The SAN advocated a relaxation of the rules governing petitions against judicial officers before the National Judicial Council, arguing that existing procedures discourage whistleblowers from exposing corrupt practices within the bench.

He noted that the requirement for petitioners to disclose their identities and swear affidavits often exposes informants to possible victimisation.

“Most people with relevant information are inhibited by these rules. They serve no useful purpose other than protecting the minority of judicial officers working against the interest of the judiciary and Nigeria,” he said.

Mekwunye also called for an amendment extending the timeframe for filing complaints against judicial officers from six months to three years.

On criminal prosecution of judges, the senior lawyer criticised the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Justice H.A. Nganjiwa, which held that serving judicial officers could not be prosecuted for official misconduct unless first disciplined by the NJC.

He described the judgment as unconstitutional and argued that it effectively grants immunity to judges outside the provisions of the Constitution.

According to him, anti-graft agencies such as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission should not be prevented from investigating or prosecuting judicial officers accused of criminal conduct.

“The Constitution guarantees equality before the law. Judicial officers should not enjoy a special shield against criminal investigation and prosecution,” he argued.

He further urged the Attorney-General of the Federation to sponsor legislation overturning the Nganjiwa decision if the judiciary fails to revisit the judgment.

Mekwunye also recommended stricter sanctions for judges who issue orders outside their jurisdiction, particularly in political and election matters.

He proposed the creation of a “black book” by the NJC for erring judges and another by the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee for senior lawyers found culpable of professional misconduct.

According to him, judges found by superior courts to have deliberately exercised powers they do not possess should be dismissed and publicly blacklisted.

“This will sanitise the judiciary, protect the integrity of honest judges and restore confidence in our democracy,” he stated.

The SAN further blamed controversial election judgments in Plateau State for undermining democratic values, alleging that appellate court decisions imposed politicians rejected by voters on the people.

He therefore advocated an amendment to Section 246(3) of the Constitution to allow limited appeals to the Supreme Court in National and State Assembly election disputes where constitutional interpretation or disregard of binding precedents is involved.

Mekwunye maintained that the majority of Court of Appeal justices remained professional and committed to justice, but lamented that honest judges often suffer punitive transfers and denial of privileges for refusing to compromise.

He stressed that judicial officers who deliberately ignore constitutional provisions and Supreme Court precedents in election cases should be held accountable, whether serving or retired.

Quoting a previous Supreme Court pronouncement in the Manasseh case, he noted that disregarding clear constitutional provisions and binding precedents amounted to “judicial misconduct of a very extreme proportion.”

He warned that history would judge harshly judicial officers who aid the subversion of democracy through questionable interpretations of electoral laws and constitutional provisions.

“They shall be remembered as judges who undermined the rule of law and enabled dubious politicians to impose themselves on the people,” he added.