Follow Us on Google
There is a disturbing trend emerging from the legal and political skirmishes arising from disputes among politicians already jostling for power ahead of the 2027 general election.
Increasingly, Nigeria’s judiciary is coming under assault from dissatisfied litigants who approach the courts seeking redress, only to turn around and accuse judges of bias whenever verdicts do not favour them. Rather than accepting unfavourable outcomes within the framework of the law, many political actors resort to public attacks on judicial officers, questioning their integrity and motives.
Quite often, judges become the scapegoats of disgruntled politicians when legal outcomes do not go their way. While it cannot be denied that there are bad eggs within the judiciary, politicians themselves are frequently complicit in the very rot they condemn. It is common knowledge that desperate individuals sometimes attempt to influence judicial proceedings through inducements and other unethical means. Whenever efforts are made to compromise the independence and integrity of judges, the rule of law is weakened, with consequences that extend far beyond the courtroom and affect the larger fabric of society.
A functioning democracy depends on strong and credible institutions. The judiciary occupies a unique position in this arrangement because it serves as the final arbiter in disputes. When citizens lose confidence in the courts, the foundations of democratic governance are placed at risk. Political leaders, who should be setting examples of respect for due process, often do the opposite by casting doubt on judicial decisions whenever those decisions are not favourable to their interests.
In recent times, some prominent Nigerians occupying positions of influence have even taken their grievances abroad, publicly disparaging the country’s institutions because of unfavourable court verdicts or legal processes. Such actions damage Nigeria’s image and undermine confidence in its democratic structures. Ironically, when court judgments favour these same individuals, the judges they once criticised suddenly become courageous, impartial and forthright defenders of justice. This selective appreciation of the judiciary exposes the hypocrisy that often underlies such attacks.
Opposition politicians are not alone in this behaviour. Members of ruling parties have also been guilty of undermining institutions whenever decisions fail to align with their expectations. The problem, therefore, is not ideological but cultural. Across the political spectrum, many actors appear willing to support institutions only when they serve their immediate interests.
Other News
More recently, this unfortunate tendency has spread beyond the judiciary to other national institutions, including the Police, security agencies and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). We have witnessed situations where policy decisions taken by the election management body are praised by one group and condemned by another, only for those positions to be reversed when circumstances change. A decision considered fair and lawful today suddenly becomes evidence of bias tomorrow, depending on who benefits from it.
This pattern is particularly dangerous because it places the credibility of institutions at the mercy of partisan interests. If every decision made by INEC, the courts or security agencies is judged solely by its political outcome, then public confidence in those institutions will continue to erode. Citizens may begin to view every official action through a partisan lens, making it increasingly difficult for institutions to perform their constitutional responsibilities effectively.
Democracy cannot thrive where institutions are respected only when they produce preferred outcomes. The true test of democratic maturity is the willingness to accept lawful decisions even when they are inconvenient or disappointing. Political competition is inevitable in any democracy, but it must be conducted within the boundaries of respect for the institutions that sustain the system.
As the country moves closer to the 2027 elections, political leaders must exercise restraint in their rhetoric and actions. Criticism of institutions is legitimate when it is constructive and supported by evidence. However, reckless attacks designed solely to delegitimise unfavourable decisions weaken public trust and threaten national cohesion.
Nigeria’s democracy is still evolving, and its institutions remain works in progress. Strengthening them requires commitment from all stakeholders, especially those who seek public office. The judiciary, INEC, security agencies and other national institutions must be allowed to operate independently and without intimidation. If political actors continue to undermine these institutions for short-term advantage, the ultimate casualty will not be their opponents but the democratic system itself. Respect for institutions, even in moments of political disappointment, remains one of the most important responsibilities of leadership.
• Ayodeji, marriage counsellor, author, media expert and philosopher, can be reached on 09059243004 (WhatsApp only)
