A coalition of senior legal practitioners, operating under the banner of Lawyers in Defence of Justice (LiDoF), has expressed outrage over what it describes as unwarranted and mischievous attacks on the judiciary, particularly targeting the Heads of Federal Courts in Nigeria.
In a statement released in Abuja, the group decried efforts to drag the judiciary into political controversies, citing the ongoing political crisis in Rivers State as a glaring example. They emphasized that such actions are not only baseless but also detrimental to the sanctity of the judiciary.
The statement, signed by LiDoF Executive Director Silas Igwuebe and Secretary Boniface Olufade, warned that the association would not hesitate to escalate the matter to the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) for appropriate sanctions. They also urged the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) to take stringent measures against lawyers involved in public vilification of judges.
LiDoF criticized senior members of the legal profession for contributing to the narrative that undermines the judiciary. According to the group, it is disheartening that individuals who understand the workings of the courts would engage in what they called a campaign of calumny.
The group defended judicial processes, pointing out that the assignment of cases, particularly those related to the political turmoil in Rivers State, adhered to proper protocol.
Cases relating to the political crisis in Rivers State were duly assigned by the Chief Judge of the Court,” the statement said. “The assignment of multiple cases to the same judge, when they concern the same subject matter and parties, is standard practice and promotes efficient case management while preventing conflicting judgments.
LiDoF also addressed allegations that judges could be influenced through a housing scheme initiated by the Federal Government. The group dismissed these claims as absurd, pointing out that similar schemes have been operational in states like Lagos without controversy.
This is not the first time such an owner-occupier housing scheme has been initiated for judges, the statement read. It is ridiculous to suggest that judges could be bought over through a housing project they are ordinarily entitled to.
The association called on critics to follow established legal procedures for addressing grievances, such as filing formal applications for a judge’s recusal, instead of resorting to public accusations.
LiDoF further warned that it would take decisive steps if the attacks on the judiciary persist, emphasizing its commitment to protecting the integrity of the judicial system.
As the discourse around judicial integrity intensifies, LiDoF’s stance highlights the urgent need for constructive dialogue and adherence to due process, ensuring that the judiciary remains a neutral arbiter free from undue influence or public misrepresentation.