- The Supreme Court is a policy court which should not be saddled with every manner of cause. Any litigant who has had a bite at the cherry in two courts (High Court and Appeals) ought generally to be satisfied.
- Going to the Supreme Court ought to be by judicial review, in my view.
- The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) hears cases only by certiorari (judicial review), and it first of all determines whether the case would add anything to jurisprudence (in which case, it would grant leave to hear the appeal or it was filed to restate the obvious. By the way, the United States of America, with many more lawyers and court cases than Nigeria, has a 9 Judge Member Supreme Court!
- A personal example of how the right of appeal is abused in Nigeria may suffice. Many years ago, we got judgment in our favour at the three levels of High Court to Supreme Court in an employment matter in which a commercial bank employee sued asking for reinstatement after dismissal from his job!
- As any rookie lawyer would tell you, the only employee who can ask for reinstatement successfully is one whose employment enjoys statutory flavour.
- Employment with “statutory flavour” means the employment relationship is governed by laws or statutes rather than just the terms of a contract. This provides special legal protection to the employee, requiring any actions like disciplinary measures or termination to follow the prescribed statutory procedures. In essence, it elevates the employment relationship beyond a simple master-servant arrangement, giving the employee greater security and protection.
- For example, Central Bank is a creation of statute. And so an ex-employee of CBN may go to court to press for his job back after dismissal, citing breaches of the statutory provisions pertaining to his employment.
- In this case, the employer was a commercial bank, and the employment did not enjoy statutory flavour.
- Learned counsel for the appellant in the cause I am talking about, knowing the true state of the law appealed the judgment right up to the Supreme Court, knowing that he was sure to lose, as he did not canvas any reason why the Supreme Court should adapt the principle of employment with statutory flavour to a commercial bank non-creation of statute.
- This case lasted years and was a thorough abuse of the right to appeal.
- What sort of system tolerates this kind of frivolous, time-wasting litigation, and then creates a 30-person Supreme Court?
- Solution: Do not increase the number of justices at the Supreme Court RATHER Cut down on the number of cases which go right to the Supreme Court. This will require a constitutional amendment, specifically of S. 233 (2).
I may not completely agree that increasing the number of Supreme Court Justices is a solution , comparing the roles , scope and jurisdiction of the US Supreme Court to the Nigeria Supreme Court is a mismatch. The US justice system Court hierarchy is not the same as that of Nigeria. The US Federal Supreme Court is not in the same class as the Nigeria Supreme Court. The US Supreme Court is largely a Federal Constitutional Court .
Ikeazor Akaraiwe, SAN, raises a valid point. Increasing the number of Supreme Court justices might not address the root issue of frivolous litigation. Perhaps the focus should be on reforming the system to prevent unnecessary cases from reaching the Supreme Court. What do you think about this perspective?