There are have been occasions where some lawyers are
disappointed at either the character or the manner of handling a
case by a judge in court or in a matter that they are involved in,
especially in the high court. Also, no doubt that the motive of
every lawyer representing a client is to ensure that his client
becomes victorious in the case, hence, the use of every skill known
to the lawyer to ensure that his goal in court is achieved in
favour of his client. However, at some occasions, this might not
work according to how the lawyer had envisaged. This might have
been the cause of the statement made by some of these lawyers that
that particular judge ‘does not know
law’, especially a High Court’s Judge who preside
over trial proceedings and weigh evidence, though, they might be
right sometimes (having regard to the human nature to the judicial
officers, with due respect!
In my humble view, it is important to note that the position of
a high court judge is a position that is really uneasy. The
Constitutional requirement of a minimum of 10 years post call for
qualification of an appointment to be a high court judge is
important to mention. At this stage or level, such judge is
presumed to still be in the youthful age and still agile to do a
lot of legal researches and to hold long hearing proceedings
between or among parties before the court. How would it in the
normal sense, take a lawyer of 10 years post call to know all the
law?! That is why in my humble view, the Constitution has also
provided that an aggrieved litigant has the right to appeal against
the decision of a high court judge whether interlocutory or final
decision. In fact, as a matter of fact, some lawyers who got the
privilege of being appointed to the bench as a judge of the high
court might not be doing well under the said 10 years post call,
with due respect to them! That is why some lawyers might see the
judicial office as a place of rest and rescue from the rigorous
nature of the private practice, though, I understand that even some
public offices’ jobs are tedious as though the private practice.
That is why how much someone has done as a lawyer before becoming a
holder of a judicial office will tell in his capacity as a judge.
If he was lazy, his laziness will embarrass him and if he had been
hardworking, his hard work will win him many awards in his capacity
as a judge. That is why I recommend most humbly that the
appointment to the office of a judge should be on merit rather than
being on how connected you are to any influential person or as a
family arrangement. Also, there should be a continuous training for
judicial officers. This will equip them in delivering a
qualitative, just and judicious decision/judgment, having regards
to the facts and evidence placed before the court by parties to the
dispute.
Furthermore, we all (as lawyers) have to understand that
everyone has a new beginning in life even a year old lawyer (post
call). Therefore, one has to undergo a new learning faculty in such
new environment and new beginning. Even if a Senior Advocate of
Nigeria (with due respect), is appointed as a high court judge, he
still needs to learn the new office and its customs, which he might
not really find very interesting and or easy in his first few
years. That is why after a gradual learning, skills and research
skills that he has acquired, he performs better (and that is for a
diligent judge). More so, the appellate court taking cognizance of
the years of a high court judge as a judge, is likely not to
chastise such judge for slight and forgivable error where there is
an appeal on the decision of that particular judge. Sometimes too,
the justices of the appellate court direct that the judge who
delivered the decision/judgement being appealed against should be
served a copy of the judgment of the appellate court perhaps for
the high court judge to consider the reasoning and decision of the
appellate court.
Furthermore, it is no doubt that the judicial role and the
office is not an easy task beyond what is seen by the audience in
the open court. Many times too, judicial officers have to battle
with both ceremonial, administrative and judicial roles at the same
time, therefore, as a human, all these multi-tasking functions have
impacts on their health and commitment to the judicial functions
and cause backlog of cases on the judicial docket. A footballer too
is blamed many times by even someone who cannot even dribble his
opponents not to talk of scoring a goal because such a spectator
does not really know how tedious the football field is in
motion!
Finally, I humbly recommend that high judge judges should be
tolerated for some of their mistakes especially those in their
early years in the judicial office and where there is any grievance
against their decision/judgment (though, it might be very annoying
sometimes), an appeal to the appellate court would be more proper
in that circumstance rather than alleging that a judge
‘does not know law’ as this comment (even
if it is true about some judges in some high courts, with due
respect to My Lords), is likely to undermine the integrity of that
judicial office and the judiciary as a body.
Email: hameed_ajibola@yahoo.com[1]
There are have been occasions where some lawyers are
disappointed at either the character or the manner of handling a
case by a judge in court or in a matter that they are involved in,
especially in the high court. Also, no doubt that the motive of
every lawyer representing a client is to ensure that his client
becomes victorious in the case, hence, the use of every skill known
to the lawyer to ensure that his goal in court is achieved in
favour of his client. However, at some occasions, this might not
work according to how the lawyer had envisaged. This might have
been the cause of the statement made by some of these lawyers that
that particular judge ‘does not know
law’, especially a High Court’s Judge who preside
over trial proceedings and weigh evidence, though, they might be
right sometimes (having regard to the human nature to the judicial
officers, with due respect!
In my humble view, it is important to note that the position of
a high court judge is a position that is really uneasy. The
Constitutional requirement of a minimum of 10 years post call for
qualification of an appointment to be a high court judge is
important to mention. At this stage or level, such judge is
presumed to still be in the youthful age and still agile to do a
lot of legal researches and to hold long hearing proceedings
between or among parties before the court. How would it in the
normal sense, take a lawyer of 10 years post call to know all the
law?! That is why in my humble view, the Constitution has also
provided that an aggrieved litigant has the right to appeal against
the decision of a high court judge whether interlocutory or final
decision. In fact, as a matter of fact, some lawyers who got the
privilege of being appointed to the bench as a judge of the high
court might not be doing well under the said 10 years post call,
with due respect to them! That is why some lawyers might see the
judicial office as a place of rest and rescue from the rigorous
nature of the private practice, though, I understand that even some
public offices’ jobs are tedious as though the private practice.
That is why how much someone has done as a lawyer before becoming a
holder of a judicial office will tell in his capacity as a judge.
If he was lazy, his laziness will embarrass him and if he had been
hardworking, his hard work will win him many awards in his capacity
as a judge. That is why I recommend most humbly that the
appointment to the office of a judge should be on merit rather than
being on how connected you are to any influential person or as a
family arrangement. Also, there should be a continuous training for
judicial officers. This will equip them in delivering a
qualitative, just and judicious decision/judgment, having regards
to the facts and evidence placed before the court by parties to the
dispute.
Furthermore, we all (as lawyers) have to understand that
everyone has a new beginning in life even a year old lawyer (post
call). Therefore, one has to undergo a new learning faculty in such
new environment and new beginning. Even if a Senior Advocate of
Nigeria (with due respect), is appointed as a high court judge, he
still needs to learn the new office and its customs, which he might
not really find very interesting and or easy in his first few
years. That is why after a gradual learning, skills and research
skills that he has acquired, he performs better (and that is for a
diligent judge). More so, the appellate court taking cognizance of
the years of a high court judge as a judge, is likely not to
chastise such judge for slight and forgivable error where there is
an appeal on the decision of that particular judge. Sometimes too,
the justices of the appellate court direct that the judge who
delivered the decision/judgement being appealed against should be
served a copy of the judgment of the appellate court perhaps for
the high court judge to consider the reasoning and decision of the
appellate court.
Furthermore, it is no doubt that the judicial role and the
office is not an easy task beyond what is seen by the audience in
the open court. Many times too, judicial officers have to battle
with both ceremonial, administrative and judicial roles at the same
time, therefore, as a human, all these multi-tasking functions have
impacts on their health and commitment to the judicial functions
and cause backlog of cases on the judicial docket. A footballer too
is blamed many times by even someone who cannot even dribble his
opponents not to talk of scoring a goal because such a spectator
does not really know how tedious the football field is in
motion!
Finally, I humbly recommend that high judge judges should be
tolerated for some of their mistakes especially those in their
early years in the judicial office and where there is any grievance
against their decision/judgment (though, it might be very annoying
sometimes), an appeal to the appellate court would be more proper
in that circumstance rather than alleging that a judge
‘does not know law’ as this comment (even
if it is true about some judges in some high courts, with due
respect to My Lords), is likely to undermine the integrity of that
judicial office and the judiciary as a body.
Email: hameed_ajibola@yahoo.com[1]