2027: CJN warns judges against ‘romancing’ political parties

The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun on Monday warned Judges in different courts across the country against romancing political parties in the resolution of disputes.

Kekere-Ekun warned that on no account should any Judge exhibit conduct or behaviour that could jeopardise their absolute expected impartiality in resolving disputes that will arise in the conduct of the 2027 general elections.

Daily Trust reports that there have been a series of pre-election cases, which arose after primary elections of different political parties in various courts across the country ahead of 2027 general elections.

Speaking at the occasion of the 2026 Legal Year of the Supreme Court of Nigeria, the CJN also canvassed for adequate protection of processes leading to the appointment of judicial officers for the judiciary of Nigeria.

• Troops kill ISWAP commander, 40 Terrorists in Borno
• BREAKING: Pantami Gives INEC 72 Hours To Publish Name On guber List

“Elections inevitably generate heightened political activity and strong emotions. They also bring before the courts disputes that may have significant consequences for individuals, political parties and the country.

“The Judiciary must approach such matters with the same calmness, detachment and fidelity to the law that it brings to every other dispute.

“Judicial officers must remain conscious that every word they speak and every action they take during an electoral period will be subjected to scrutiny.

“They must exercise restraint, avoid political association or conduct capable of creating an appearance of partiality and remain firmly within the boundaries imposed by their oath and the Constitution.

“There is also a need for greater professional responsibility by lawyers in the institution of proceedings arising from political and electoral disputes.

“Forum shopping, whether by the deliberate choice of commencing an action in a court or division perceived to be more favourable to a particular party or by the institution of multiple proceedings seeking substantially similar reliefs, can result in conflicting orders, undermine orderly judicial process and expose the Judiciary to avoidable embarrassment.

“It can also create the unfortunate impression that parties are seeking not justice according to law but a particular outcome from a particular court.

“There is, moreover, a broader institutional concern. It does not augur well for our judicial system or the administration of justice if the courts become so overwhelmed by political disputes that other cases in their dockets are consequently delayed or denied the timely attention they require.

“The Judiciary must remain available to all litigants, and the urgency or public prominence of political litigation should not come at the expense of other legitimate claims awaiting determination.

“Counsel must exercise the professional judgment expected of members of the Bar before commencing proceedings, particularly where related proceedings are already pending before another court.

“The duty of counsel to the Court requires full candour as to the existence of related proceedings and respect for the jurisdiction and processes of other courts.

“The responsibility of counsel extends beyond securing an immediate advantage for a client; it includes a duty to protect the integrity and orderly functioning of the judicial process,” Kekere-Ekun said.

According to her, the appointment of judicial officers is one of the most consequential responsibilities entrusted to the National Judicial Council and the Federal Judicial Service Commission.

“A Judge does not merely occupy an office; he or she carries the authority of the Constitution and the confidence of the people.

“For that reason, the processes through which judicial officers are selected must command public confidence. The recent appointments have reflected a deliberate effort to strengthen the evaluation of candidates through structured assessment, professional and peer feedback, background checks and, in the case of shortlisted candidates, an opportunity for members of the public to comment on their integrity and professional reputation.

“This process must be protected from abuse. It should never become a trial by publicity or an avenue for settling personal disagreements and professional scores.

“The same restraint is required in the wider public space, where social media
is increasingly used to turn professional disagreements into personal attacks,
ridicule, threats and harassment. We must resist this culture.

“There are proper channels for criticising judgments, reporting professional misconduct and complaining about the conduct of judicial officers or legal practitioners.

“The administration of justice cannot be left to anger, intimidation or trial by social media.

“A Judge should be able to decide according to law without fear of personal retaliation. A lawyer should be able to make a legitimate submission without being subjected to intimidation.

“A member of staff should be able to perform his or her duties without harassment. The dignity of the profession is the collective responsibility of the Bench and the Bar.” she added.