Nigeria faces and has been facing serious challenges in the
administration of criminal justice and this has affected the image
of the judiciary, the government and the legal profession.
The perception of some Nigerians, rightly or wrongly is that a
fair and just administration of criminal justice is possible but
that the critical stakeholders are in an illicit liaison to pervert
the cause of justice.
There is also the perception that the administration of criminal
justice is heavily weighed against the ordinary people of Nigeria
and that accounts for the overrepresentation of people from modest
backgrounds in the various penal institutions in Nigeria.
Hence, some people have pointed out that those with means can
fight their way out of any form of trouble with the law while the
lowly and vulnerable depend on the benevolence of the law
enforcement agencies and the judiciary when they are on the wrong
side of the law. Unfortunately, the problems and challenges
associated with the administration of criminal justice are
multifaceted and the more the critical stakeholders try to get to
understand the challenges and get to grips with them, the more the
problems and challenges are entrenched and solidified.
Some of the problems in the criminal justice chain revolve
around the arbitrary and sometimes confusing powers of the police
in the arrest of alleged criminal offenders; the use of unwholesome
means in the investigation of crimes; the paucity of funds and lack
of investigation capacity by some of the law enforcement agencies;
the lack of sufficient number of prosecution and judicial officers,
delay in the administrations of criminal justice; the lack of
understanding and proper understanding of the processes and
procedures of our courts of law and the antics and manoeuvres of
legal practitioners.
The direct implication and logical consequence of some of these
problems and challenges is the congestions and overflowing of penal
facilities and the attendant spread of diseases and lack of
confidence in the judicial process.
Furthermore, the ordinary people who believe that they cannot
get justice are more likely to take the laws into their hands and
use extra judicial and extra constitutional means to achieve their
own brand of justice. In different parts of Nigeria, we have an
avalanche of vigilante groups performing police duties in terms of
bearing arms, making arrests and detaining those that are suspected
of penal infringement.
In different parts of Nigeria, the ordinary people are taking
the laws into their hands and meting out instant justice to
suspects as some of the people accuse the police of corruption and
illicit liaison with criminal elements. Innocent persons have in
the process been sent to their untimely grave due to the use of
unconstitutional and illegal means to dispense instant justice.
On the flip side, innocent people that ought to be presumed
innocent until proven guilty before a properly constituted court of
law are herded to the penal institutions because of their lack of
means and sometimes the corruption of the system. Successive
regimes have initiated reforms in the administration of criminal
justice and the problems and challenges remain and the question is
why?
Why are we still treating justice for the ordinary people of
Nigeria as an option of charity? Why did previous efforts at reform
fail? Did reforms fail on account of elite conspiracy or lack of
will on the part of those that are supposed to drive the reform
process? Where are we in the reform effort? The latest attempt to
address the challenge and problems bedevilling criminal justice
administration led to the initiation and promulgation of the
Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 to be in operation in
the federal courts in Nigeria and courts of the Federal Capital
Territory, Abuja.
This legislation repealed the Criminal Procedure Act and the
Criminal Procedure Code which was applicable in all federal courts
and courts in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. But more than
just regulating criminal procedure, the Act covers a whole gamut of
criminal justice process from arrest, investigation, trial,
custodial matters and sentencing guidelines.
Apparently, the provisions of the Act are focused towards
ensuring that the system of administration of criminal justice in
Nigeria promotes efficient management of all criminal justice
institutions, speedy dispensation of justice, and protection of the
rights and interests of the suspects and the victims of crime.
However, due to the diversity of Nigeria, our constitutional
limitations and the federal structure of Nigeria, the
Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 does not have
universal application throughout Nigeria.
The implication is that each State of Nigeria that truly desires
it and sees it as a progressive legislation can within the context
and limits of its state peculiarities domesticate and adapt it to
its own uses and needs. Following the trend of the ongoing reforms
in the criminal justice system, so many states across Nigeria have
promulgated and adapted the said law with few modifications.
For instance, Kaduna State adopted the Administration of
Criminal Justice Act and repealed its Penal Code on May 29, 2017.
The Law is cited as the Kaduna State Administration of Criminal
Justice Law, 2017 and it is to provide for the administration of
criminal justice in the courts of Kaduna State and for related
matters, 2017 while the Penal Code is cited as the Kaduna State
Penal Code Law 2017 and it is to penalize crimes prescribed under
the Law and other matters connected thereto, 2017.
With the domestication of the law in so any states of the
federation, what then can the critical stakeholders do to make it
work? The stakeholders in this sense are those with the capacity to
affect a particular policy, issue or organization and can be
affected by the same policies or issues. In the administration of
criminal justice, some stakeholders are apparent.
The courts and the Judges that sit in the courts are core
stakeholders, the law enforcement agencies that arrest offenders,
investigate crimes and charge penal suspects to court are core
stakeholders and lawyers in the private and official bar are core
stakeholders. To achieve a just and efficient criminal justice
administration, there are irreducible minimums that must be met and
their absence impairs and blurs the efficient and just dispensation
of justice.
These minimums encompass the right to fair hearing within a
reasonable time, public hearing and accountability, the right to be
informed promptly and in the language that the suspect understands
and in details of the nature of the offence, the need for adequate
time and facilities for the preparation of defense, the entitlement
to the services of a legal practitioner of choice and the right to
an interpreter. It encompassed the right to life and the taking of
life in a manner prescribed by law.
It encompassed the right to the dignity of the human person and
the right to personal liberty. Fair hearing is therefore not an
esoteric concept but a concept designed to guard against
arbitrariness. Fair hearing in ordinary parlance connotes hearing
the other side. In criminal law, it is said that no one should be
condemned without being heard.
Due process also encompasses and warehouses some other rights of
suspects and accused persons. It encompasses complying with the law
and the constitution in matters of arrest, detention, interrogation
and being charged to court.
To achieve a just administration of criminal justice, the
stakeholders must come to grips with the lack of concrete attention
and requisite and adequate budgetary provision for criminal justice
institutions; low morale and severely limited capacity utilization
in most of the institutions as a result of poor funding, lack of
capacity building and neglect of the institution by successive
governments; steady decline in the standard and quality of the
justice delivery mechanisms as a result of poor funding, decaying
infrastructure and inadequacy of equipment and materials; lack of
coordination and, in certain cases, disharmony within the key
institutions that are critical to justice delivery; blame game,
buck passing and finger pointing in the discharge of the primary
responsibilities of these institutions as none is ready to accept
responsibility for the challenges bedevilling the institutions;
absence or inadequacy of fiscal control measures in almost all the
justice sector institutions that suggests there might be some
leakages, wastages and delays in the release of appropriated funds
due to the institutions from relevant sources; lack of modern
infrastructure in the justice delivery system; the slow pace of the
administration of justice and the manipulation of the law and the
procedures by the gatekeepers in the administration of justice; the
manipulation and corruption of the levers of justice by some of the
key stakeholders resulting in anger, frustration and patronization
of other extra judicial means and mechanisms in enforcing perceived
rights and general lack of fidelity to the rule of law and due
process.
Culled From newtelegraphonline
Nigeria faces and has been facing serious challenges in the
administration of criminal justice and this has affected the image
of the judiciary, the government and the legal profession.
The perception of some Nigerians, rightly or wrongly is that a
fair and just administration of criminal justice is possible but
that the critical stakeholders are in an illicit liaison to pervert
the cause of justice.
There is also the perception that the administration of criminal
justice is heavily weighed against the ordinary people of Nigeria
and that accounts for the overrepresentation of people from modest
backgrounds in the various penal institutions in Nigeria.
Hence, some people have pointed out that those with means can
fight their way out of any form of trouble with the law while the
lowly and vulnerable depend on the benevolence of the law
enforcement agencies and the judiciary when they are on the wrong
side of the law. Unfortunately, the problems and challenges
associated with the administration of criminal justice are
multifaceted and the more the critical stakeholders try to get to
understand the challenges and get to grips with them, the more the
problems and challenges are entrenched and solidified.
Some of the problems in the criminal justice chain revolve
around the arbitrary and sometimes confusing powers of the police
in the arrest of alleged criminal offenders; the use of unwholesome
means in the investigation of crimes; the paucity of funds and lack
of investigation capacity by some of the law enforcement agencies;
the lack of sufficient number of prosecution and judicial officers,
delay in the administrations of criminal justice; the lack of
understanding and proper understanding of the processes and
procedures of our courts of law and the antics and manoeuvres of
legal practitioners.
The direct implication and logical consequence of some of these
problems and challenges is the congestions and overflowing of penal
facilities and the attendant spread of diseases and lack of
confidence in the judicial process.
Furthermore, the ordinary people who believe that they cannot
get justice are more likely to take the laws into their hands and
use extra judicial and extra constitutional means to achieve their
own brand of justice. In different parts of Nigeria, we have an
avalanche of vigilante groups performing police duties in terms of
bearing arms, making arrests and detaining those that are suspected
of penal infringement.
In different parts of Nigeria, the ordinary people are taking
the laws into their hands and meting out instant justice to
suspects as some of the people accuse the police of corruption and
illicit liaison with criminal elements. Innocent persons have in
the process been sent to their untimely grave due to the use of
unconstitutional and illegal means to dispense instant justice.
On the flip side, innocent people that ought to be presumed
innocent until proven guilty before a properly constituted court of
law are herded to the penal institutions because of their lack of
means and sometimes the corruption of the system. Successive
regimes have initiated reforms in the administration of criminal
justice and the problems and challenges remain and the question is
why?
Why are we still treating justice for the ordinary people of
Nigeria as an option of charity? Why did previous efforts at reform
fail? Did reforms fail on account of elite conspiracy or lack of
will on the part of those that are supposed to drive the reform
process? Where are we in the reform effort? The latest attempt to
address the challenge and problems bedevilling criminal justice
administration led to the initiation and promulgation of the
Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 to be in operation in
the federal courts in Nigeria and courts of the Federal Capital
Territory, Abuja.
This legislation repealed the Criminal Procedure Act and the
Criminal Procedure Code which was applicable in all federal courts
and courts in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. But more than
just regulating criminal procedure, the Act covers a whole gamut of
criminal justice process from arrest, investigation, trial,
custodial matters and sentencing guidelines.
Apparently, the provisions of the Act are focused towards
ensuring that the system of administration of criminal justice in
Nigeria promotes efficient management of all criminal justice
institutions, speedy dispensation of justice, and protection of the
rights and interests of the suspects and the victims of crime.
However, due to the diversity of Nigeria, our constitutional
limitations and the federal structure of Nigeria, the
Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 does not have
universal application throughout Nigeria.
The implication is that each State of Nigeria that truly desires
it and sees it as a progressive legislation can within the context
and limits of its state peculiarities domesticate and adapt it to
its own uses and needs. Following the trend of the ongoing reforms
in the criminal justice system, so many states across Nigeria have
promulgated and adapted the said law with few modifications.
For instance, Kaduna State adopted the Administration of
Criminal Justice Act and repealed its Penal Code on May 29, 2017.
The Law is cited as the Kaduna State Administration of Criminal
Justice Law, 2017 and it is to provide for the administration of
criminal justice in the courts of Kaduna State and for related
matters, 2017 while the Penal Code is cited as the Kaduna State
Penal Code Law 2017 and it is to penalize crimes prescribed under
the Law and other matters connected thereto, 2017.
With the domestication of the law in so any states of the
federation, what then can the critical stakeholders do to make it
work? The stakeholders in this sense are those with the capacity to
affect a particular policy, issue or organization and can be
affected by the same policies or issues. In the administration of
criminal justice, some stakeholders are apparent.
The courts and the Judges that sit in the courts are core
stakeholders, the law enforcement agencies that arrest offenders,
investigate crimes and charge penal suspects to court are core
stakeholders and lawyers in the private and official bar are core
stakeholders. To achieve a just and efficient criminal justice
administration, there are irreducible minimums that must be met and
their absence impairs and blurs the efficient and just dispensation
of justice.
These minimums encompass the right to fair hearing within a
reasonable time, public hearing and accountability, the right to be
informed promptly and in the language that the suspect understands
and in details of the nature of the offence, the need for adequate
time and facilities for the preparation of defense, the entitlement
to the services of a legal practitioner of choice and the right to
an interpreter. It encompassed the right to life and the taking of
life in a manner prescribed by law.
It encompassed the right to the dignity of the human person and
the right to personal liberty. Fair hearing is therefore not an
esoteric concept but a concept designed to guard against
arbitrariness. Fair hearing in ordinary parlance connotes hearing
the other side. In criminal law, it is said that no one should be
condemned without being heard.
Due process also encompasses and warehouses some other rights of
suspects and accused persons. It encompasses complying with the law
and the constitution in matters of arrest, detention, interrogation
and being charged to court.
To achieve a just administration of criminal justice, the
stakeholders must come to grips with the lack of concrete attention
and requisite and adequate budgetary provision for criminal justice
institutions; low morale and severely limited capacity utilization
in most of the institutions as a result of poor funding, lack of
capacity building and neglect of the institution by successive
governments; steady decline in the standard and quality of the
justice delivery mechanisms as a result of poor funding, decaying
infrastructure and inadequacy of equipment and materials; lack of
coordination and, in certain cases, disharmony within the key
institutions that are critical to justice delivery; blame game,
buck passing and finger pointing in the discharge of the primary
responsibilities of these institutions as none is ready to accept
responsibility for the challenges bedevilling the institutions;
absence or inadequacy of fiscal control measures in almost all the
justice sector institutions that suggests there might be some
leakages, wastages and delays in the release of appropriated funds
due to the institutions from relevant sources; lack of modern
infrastructure in the justice delivery system; the slow pace of the
administration of justice and the manipulation of the law and the
procedures by the gatekeepers in the administration of justice; the
manipulation and corruption of the levers of justice by some of the
key stakeholders resulting in anger, frustration and patronization
of other extra judicial means and mechanisms in enforcing perceived
rights and general lack of fidelity to the rule of law and due
process.
Culled From newtelegraphonline
Read more https://nairalaw.com/crisis-and-conflict-in-criminal-justice-administration-1-by-festus-okoye/