Liborous Oshoma, a well-known human rights activist, recently raised serious concerns regarding the judicial chaos surrounding local government elections in Rivers State. In an interview with ARISE News Channel, affiliated with THISDAY Newspapers, he urgently called for reforms in Nigeria’s judicial system, emphasizing the increasing politicization of the judiciary and its adverse effects on democracy.

Oshoma highlighted his alarm over the damaging consequences of conflicting judicial orders, stressing that the judicial system is in dire need of reform. He noted that while most Nigerians adhere to the law, the political climate has become a destructive force within the judiciary. “Anything that politicians touch in this country tends to deteriorate,” he stated. He attributed many of these challenges to the judiciary’s involvement in pre- and post-election issues.

Proposing a radical solution, he suggested completely removing election-related cases from the courts. “Once politicians realize that the judiciary won’t affect election outcomes, their attempts to sway the courts will naturally diminish,” he explained.

Oshoma recalled past instances of judicial conflict, particularly when the Supreme Court intervened in election petitions that were originally under the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal. “Historically, disputes over governorship elections would be settled at the Court of Appeal. What was the trigger for the Supreme Court’s involvement? An infamous order from Justice Ikpeme back in 1992, which halted elections, sparked considerable controversy. In Segun Adeniyi’s book, ‘Politics, People, and Power,’ he notes how some governors tried to manipulate their Chief Justices into issuing conflicting orders,” he remarked.

He pointed to ongoing inconsistencies, such as a recent case where a court in Abuja declared the seat of former APC National Chairman Adams Oshiomhole invalid, only for a court in Kano to issue a contradictory ruling. He highlighted that this inconsistency has undermined public trust in the legal system, referencing internal conflicts within the PDP back in 2015. “We often see a decision from Abuja followed by another conflicting one from the Rivers State Federal High Court. It’s unacceptable for courts of equal standing to issue contradictory judgments on similar cases,” he said.

One of Oshoma’s key proposals is to implement an electronic docket system within the judiciary. This system would allow judges to check pending cases and prevent similar issues from being adjudicated by different courts at the same time. He stressed the importance of stricter oversight in case assignments to deter politicians from trying to seek favorable rulings through “forum shopping.”

“The federal judiciary should adopt administrative measures to eliminate such contradictions. The Chief Judge can implement these practical guidelines without requiring a constitutional amendment,” he suggested.

Oshoma also tackled the broader issue of political influence on judicial appointments. He stressed that the processes for appointing, dismissing, and compensating judges must be shielded from political pressures. “Politicians fully understand that judicial appointments can dictate their grip on power, which makes it vital to insulate these processes,” he added.

In conclusion, Oshoma underscored the urgent need for a complete overhaul of how pre- and post-election disputes are managed. “We need to extract politics from judicial involvement in these matters. As long as judges have a say in who holds public office, we will continue to face these unnecessary interferences,” he asserted.