The judiciary and the future of Nigeria’s democracy

No democracy anywhere in the world can thrive without a strong, credible, and independent judiciary. The courts are not only meant to interpret laws but also to serve as the last hope of the common man, especially when democratic institutions fail or are manipulated. In recent years, however, Nigeria’s judiciary, particularly on electoral matters, has underperformed, leaving the public disillusioned and democracy on shaky ground.

This disillusionment has deepened since the contentious 2023 general elections. While elections are supposed to be the bedrock of democracy, in Nigeria, they have increasingly become legal battles rather than reflections of the will of the people. Since 1999, every presidential election has ended up in court. That reality underscores a worrying lack of trust in the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the electoral system, and, regrettably, in the judiciary itself.

The February 25, 2023, presidential election was meant to mark a new era, with the introduction of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and INEC’s Result Viewing Portal (IReV). But the refusal to transmit presidential results in real time, as promised, raised serious questions. Over 70 percent of Nigerians in a post-election SBM Intelligence poll expressed doubts about the credibility of the process. Local and international observers described the election as poorly managed and lacking transparency.

That election, which declared President Bola Tinubu the winner with just over 8.7 million votes, remains hotly contested by key opposition figures like Atiku Abubakar of the PDP and Peter Obi of the Labour Party, who filed legal petitions alleging irregularities, suppression of votes, and non-compliance with the Electoral Act.

Rather than being the arena for truth and fairness, the legal process itself has become part of the controversy.

The popular catchphrase, ‘Go to court’, has become less of a call for legal recourse and more of a sarcastic jab, reflecting public scepticism toward Nigeria’s courts. This is not unfounded. Several controversial judicial decisions in recent times, from the Imo State governorship case of 2020 to the 2023 pre-election disqualifications, have painted the judiciary as susceptible to manipulation, influenced more by politics than precedent.

Worse, decisions are now often rendered not on merit but on procedural technicalities. In the 2023 presidential election petitions, the tribunal rejected a large volume of video and documentary evidence on hyper-technical grounds. To many Nigerians, this felt like a strategy to avoid engaging with the substance of the claims. The petitioners were not necessarily defeated by superior arguments but by hurdles of jargon.

This trend risks turning the judiciary into an enabler of injustice rather than a bulwark against democratic collapse. If the people believe the courts cannot deliver justice, the legitimacy of both the electoral system and governance itself will be fatally undermined.

“If politicians know that manipulated elections can and will be overturned in court, they will think twice before rigging. They will campaign more and rig less. That is how democracy deepens.”

Nigeria stands at a political junction. The economy is reeling under nearly 30 percent inflation as of August 2025, the naira remains volatile, and youth unemployment sits at 53 percent. Insecurity persists in the North-West and Middle Belt, while separatist agitations remain in the South-East. These issues, worsened by poor leadership, make credible elections and judicial resolution even more vital.

The judiciary must now rise to the moment. Courts must adjudicate cases based not on fear of destabilising the polity or preserving the status quo, but on law, facts, and conscience. History shows that attempting to save a country through judicial compromise only delays the inevitable reckoning. As the saying goes, you cannot make omelettes without breaking eggs.

The Presidential Election Petition Tribunal and, by extension, the Supreme Court must understand that their decisions go beyond legalities. Their rulings have political, social, and historical consequences. If the perception grows that courts are simply rubber stamps for power, then voter apathy will rise, and a resort to undemocratic alternatives may follow.

A bold, impartial judiciary is not a threat to democracy; it is its guardian. If politicians know that manipulated elections can and will be overturned in court, they will think twice before rigging. They will campaign more and rig less. That is how democracy deepens.

But if the courts continue to dismiss valid petitions on the basis of loopholes, it sends a dangerous message that judicial activism in favour of truth is dead, and only the powerful win. That would be the beginning of democratic decay, not stability.

Judges must begin to re-earn the public’s trust. That starts with transparency in proceedings, clarity in judgements, and courage in verdicts. It also means holding INEC accountable when it fails to act independently or follow its own guidelines.

Additionally, judicial reforms are overdue. Election tribunals should not be packed with judges who owe their elevation to political actors. Timelines for adjudicating election matters must be realistic, and judgements must be made publicly accessible and in plain language.

The judiciary may not be perfect, but its integrity is Nigeria’s last line of defence against political crisis. If it fails, the consequences will be far-reaching, from loss of investor confidence to outright civic unrest.

As Nigeria continues to battle economic instability and a trust deficit in leadership, the judiciary must rise, not as a backroom for power games, but as a moral and legal compass. Democracy, after all, cannot survive without justice. And justice, when delayed, denied, or compromised, leaves behind nothing but the ruins of a failed republic.

Why impartial justice, not technicalities, will save our democracy from collapse: the ball is in your court, my lords.