President Tinubu, Is the Nigerian Judiciary Losing Its Mind?

By John Egbeazien Oshodi

In recent months, Nigeria’s judiciary has been embroiled in a wave of actions that defy the principles of justice, impartiality, and the nation’s legal foundation. The troubling alignment of top judicial figures with politically powerful actors like Nyesom Wike, Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, has raised grave concerns over judicial betrayal and “jurisdictional hijacking.” This pattern of maneuvering cases to courts that favor political agendas has ignited fears that Nigeria’s judiciary has not only lost its way but has actively compromised its independence. The consequences are profound: public trust in the judiciary is deteriorating at an alarming rate, and the very republic it was meant to protect teeters on the edge, vulnerable to manipulation and political puppetry. President Tinubu, Nigerians are asking—has the judiciary indeed gone rogue, and if so, what will this mean for the future of our democracy?

Human rights lawyer Femi Falana’s recent plea to transfer a case involving the Rivers State Independent Electoral Commission from Abuja back to its rightful jurisdiction in Rivers State exposes the depth of this dysfunction. Falana highlights breaches of the Federal High Court Act and judicial protocols, uncovering a disturbing trend of “judge shopping,” where cases are rerouted to courts with perceived political favorability rather than remaining within their original jurisdictions. This trend signals a form of institutional insanity—a judiciary drifting further from its sacred duty as a guardian of impartial justice, now bending to political pressures with little regard for its own integrity.

Public distrust has reached an alarming high, fueled by the judiciary’s conspicuous presence at Wike’s events. For many, these appearances represent an unholy alliance that reinforces the notion of “judicial prostitution,” where loyalty shifts from the law to political benefactors. Each public show of unity between judicial leaders and Wike serves as a psychological signal, creating a powerful perception of collusion that feeds the public’s skepticism. This closeness breeds a painful disillusionment, where citizens once invested in a judiciary that stood above corruption are now forced to confront a judiciary entangled with political ambitions. The Nigerian judiciary, it seems, has not only “gone mad” but has also left a deep wound in the psyche of a public that once viewed it as an institution of integrity.

The madness doesn’t stop there. Cases from across the country are increasingly rerouted to Abuja, a trend that underscores the erosion of territorial jurisdiction principles, prioritizing the powerful and influential while ordinary citizens are left with little recourse to unbiased justice. In a system where judicial outcomes seem shaped by political connections, the very function of the judiciary—to protect and enforce the rule of law—grows weaker and more distorted. The psychological impact of this transformation is profound, leaving citizens to question whether justice itself has any remaining meaning within the country’s legal system.

The urgency for the judiciary to sever visible ties with figures like Wike cannot be overstated. Public faith in judicial neutrality has already plunged to critical depths, and any further alignment with political interests only accelerates the judiciary’s descent into chaos. While President Bola Tinubu is constitutionally restrained from intervening directly in judicial matters, his silence on these troubling developments may be just as damaging; a judiciary perceived as politically controlled erodes national stability and threatens to shatter the very essence of democracy in Nigeria.

This painful spectacle highlights a desperate need for judicial reform—one that not only restores public trust and safeguards impartiality but reaffirms the judiciary as a pillar of stability. Such reforms must put an end to “judge shopping,” mandating that cases remain within their proper jurisdictions to ensure impartiality and shield the judiciary from political influence. Only by reestablishing these foundational boundaries can the judiciary reclaim its role as a credible institution, worthy of the public’s trust.

Adding to this crisis is Wike’s strategic use of high-profile projects, such as the 37-billion-naira Court of Appeal complex and new judges’ quarters, which have drawn top judicial figures into his orbit. His invitations to these events not only amplify fears of undue influence but also solidify the psychological impression of a judiciary under his sway. The very sight of judicial leaders standing by his side creates a painful reality for Nigerians: a judiciary seemingly stripped of independence, now viewed as an extension of Wike’s political machine.

Justice Joyce Abdulmalik’s recent behavior adds yet another layer to this unsettling drama. Her refusal to recuse herself from a high-stakes case involving the Rivers State LGAs, despite repeated accusations of bias and formal requests for her recusal by prominent figures such as the Rivers State Accountant General and the Central Bank of Nigeria, only deepens the public’s sense of betrayal. By keeping the case in Abuja, Abdulmalik sends a clear message that political alliances, not justice, dictate judicial decisions. The psychological toll of these actions is devastating, as citizens witness their courts seemingly stripped of dignity and manipulated by hidden agendas.

The Rivers State House of Assembly’s efforts to freeze Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s budget reveal a political struggle that has now invaded judicial chambers. Justice Abdulmalik’s involvement in these matters mirrors a disturbing trend where judges appear to use their authority to protect or advance specific political factions, a blatant betrayal of the judiciary’s sacred duty to uphold impartial justice. Such actions signify more than mere political alliances; they reveal a judiciary that is slipping further into madness, where loyalties are no longer with the law but with the influential. This reality, painfully apparent to Nigerians, embodies the “judicial prostitution” that threatens Nigeria’s democratic foundation.

Amid this turmoil, Nigerians are left to wonder if figures such as the Chief Justice and the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court in Abuja can resist Wike’s influence or if they too have become ensnared by the allure of his favors. Wike’s influence is palpably embedded in the judiciary through high-profile projects and public ceremonies, signaling his powerful hold over the very institution entrusted with Nigeria’s justice. In July, former Chief Justice Hon. Justice Olukayode Ariwoola presided over the groundbreaking of the 37-billion-naira Court of Appeal complex in Abuja, a project spearheaded by Wike. This was followed by Wike’s October event marking the initiation of new judges’ quarters, attended by Chief Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun and Court of Appeal President Justice Monica Dongban-Mensem. Their presence at Wike’s side in these moments of grand public spectacle lends a disturbing air of complicity, fueling the public’s perception that the judiciary has been pulled into Wike’s sphere of influence.

Such public displays would be viewed as red flags in any stable democracy, where judicial independence is non-negotiable and political affiliations are seen as threats to public trust. For Nigerians, the psychological impact is profound and painful. Citizens, who once looked to the judiciary as a source of justice and fairness, now find themselves questioning whether their judges can truly resist the pull of political patronage or if justice in Nigeria has been rendered a farce by political puppetry.

Nigerians are now left with an unsettling question: can the Chief Justice, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, and the President of the Court of Appeal truly resist Wike’s influence, or has the judiciary been effectively silenced by the political favors bestowed upon it? Ironically, this alliance with Wike—a figure who, along with his loyalists, seems intent on undermining the current Rivers State Governor and his administration—is being fought not in Rivers, but in far-off Abuja courtrooms. And let’s not forget, these are the same Abuja judges for whom Wike is generously building new houses and court buildings. So, is justice now secondary to all of you? Do the lives of Rivers people no longer matter as their funds are diverted from governance and daily welfare to fuel these political games?

Without bold action or vocal resistance to restore impartiality, the judiciary’s integrity will continue to crumble, leaving Nigeria’s democratic framework dangerously exposed to the dominance of political interests over constitutional rights.

The psychological toll of these developments is deep, as the people find themselves caught in a painful reality: a judiciary that once promised fairness and accountability now appears as yet another arena for political maneuvers. The Nigerian judiciary must urgently adopt accountability measures to ensure true impartiality. Judges must recuse themselves in cases where any perception of bias exists, particularly those involving powerful political figures. Without such action, the judiciary’s reputation will continue to deteriorate, transforming it from a bastion of justice into a tool manipulated by power. The unchecked degradation of judicial integrity poses nothing less than an existential threat to Nigeria’s democratic framework, leaving citizens with the painful realization that the judiciary may indeed be “mad.” If left unresolved, this compromised judiciary could become Nigeria’s Achilles’ heel—vulnerable to political whims and stripped of the constitutional integrity that it was designed to uphold.

The unraveling of Nigeria’s judiciary has far-reaching consequences beyond national borders. Global donors and international businesses, which rely heavily on judicial integrity to protect investments and enforce contracts, may increasingly view Nigeria as a risky environment, deterring much-needed foreign investment and aid. This erosion of judicial trust signals to the world that justice in Nigeria is vulnerable to manipulation, frustrating efforts toward good governance and alienating critical international allies. For Nigeria’s brightest minds, the absence of an impartial and functioning legal system drives them to seek stability and opportunity abroad, resulting in a devastating brain drain that stifles national progress.

Even the military, tasked with safeguarding national security, may be observing this institutional decay with concern. While I make no suggestion that the military should take over—given that institutionally and ethically they may not be better suited—the public increasingly sees the military as a “lesser evil.” A compromised judiciary severely undermines civilian confidence in government institutions, potentially destabilizing civil order and increasing the risk of unrest—a scenario that the military, or any stable government, would want to avoid at all costs.

Yes, the President is not supposed to interfere in judicial matters, but this madness cannot continue unchecked—especially now that President Tinubu has appointed a new Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN). The deepening crisis in the judiciary threatens not only the integrity of the courts but also the stability and reputation of the entire nation. As head of state, President Tinubu bears a responsibility to address this systemic decay, which undermines Nigeria’s democratic institutions and global standing.

President Tinubu could, on a more personal level, engage with the new CJN directly, in Yoruba if needed, and raise critical questions: "What were you thinking, attending Wike’s invitation to the judge’s residence project so soon after your appointment? This wahala is getting too much oo! Couldn’t an administrative judge, the chief registrar, or PR officer have represented the judiciary instead?" With urgency, he might urge her to reconsider actions perceived as judicial overreach or aggression against the powerless, warning that such alignments could leave him bearing the brunt of growing public distrust—both domestically and internationally—at a time when the judiciary’s independence is more crucial than ever.

Public sentiment is rife with talk that Wike, as former Rivers State Governor, played a substantial role in securing Rivers’ votes for Tinubu. The powerful role of Minister of the FCT is seen by many as his reward, but Tinubu must tread carefully—Wike’s sway over Abuja judges is widely viewed as a dark influence, and these entanglements are sparking anger among citizens. Such unchecked manipulation leads people to feel that if the civilian president cannot safeguard justice, they may take matters into their own hands.

Inaction risks being seen as tacit approval of this dysfunction and could further erode confidence in Tinubu’s administration, both domestically and internationally. This judicial madness must be addressed now, before it becomes too deeply entrenched to treat or manage.

Prof. John Egbeazien Oshodi
Professor John Egbeazien Oshodi, born in Uromi, Edo State, Nigeria, is an American-based police and prison scientist, forensic psychologist, public policy psychologist, and legal psychologist. He’s a government advisor on forensic-clinical psychological services in the USA and the founder of the Dr. John Egbeazien Oshodi Foundation for Psychological Health. With a significant role in introducing forensic psychology to Nigeria through N.U.C. and Nasarawa State University, he’s also a former Secretary-General of the Nigeria Psychological Association. He’s taught at esteemed institutions like Florida Memorial University, Florida International University, Nova Southeastern University, and more, and is currently an online faculty member at ISCOM University, Weldios University and Walden University.

Disclaimer: "The views expressed on this site are those of the contributors or columnists, and do not necessarily reflect TheNigerianVoice’s position. TheNigerianVoice will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements in the contributions or columns here."