By Trendsetter Tribune 
A detailed look at Nigeria’s long-growing problem of judicial interference—spanning historic cases, political pressure, private visits, and a shifting code of judicial conduct.
Abdul Leigh Balogun became a judge of the High Court of Lagos State in 1976. Over 17 years, he built a strong reputation for fairness and deep legal knowledge. In 1979, however, Justice Balogun made a serious misstep that nearly derailed his career—and exposed a problem in Nigeria’s judiciary that has only worsened with time.
On March 9, 1979, he delivered judgment in a land dispute filed years earlier. The losing party was shocked the next day when Justice Balogun personally visited their lawyer’s office—a highly unusual move—saying he wanted to “recall” the judgment on Monday to correct errors. When the day came, only the winning party’s lawyers attended the hearing. Even after the unusual recall process, the judge reaffirmed that the original losing side still lost.
The case reached the Supreme Court, which in 1986 condemned Balogun’s actions as “reproachable and irregular.” The Court stressed that even well-intentioned judges must avoid conduct that erodes public trust. Still, it concluded Balogun was driven not by bias, but by a misguided pursuit of perfection. He went on to retire honorably in 1993.
But the caution that once guided judges has since faded.
Decades later, the National Judicial Council removed Plateau State judge Thomas Naron after finding evidence of constant communication with a lawyer representing one side in an election case. And in 2016, Supreme Court Justice Inyang Okoro accused then-Transport Minister Rotimi Amaechi of visiting his home at night to pressure him over election appeals—allegations that were loudly denied but never transparently resolved.
More recently, political heavyweight Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso claimed he and his protégé Abba Yusuf visited the homes of all Supreme Court justices in 2019, seeking favorable decisions in the Kano governorship battle. Retired Justice Muhammad Dattijo disputed the claim and demanded names. The Supreme Court, for its part, has remained silent.
International standards are clear. According to the United Nations Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, judges must be free from pressure, inducements, and influence of any kind. Yet Nigeria’s judiciary repeatedly struggles with exactly these issues.
In June 2023, outgoing senator Adamu Bulkachuwa openly suggested that his wife—a former President of the Court of Appeal—helped influence important cases from their bedroom. Although shocking, the comments produced no meaningful investigation.
Even the Judicial Code of Conduct warns against judges forming close ties with ministers and frequent litigants. Yet in late 2023, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court visited FCT Minister Nyesom Wike to thank him for his “bias” toward judges and request prime land in Abuja—despite Wike being a regular party to litigation before the court.
Over time, Nigeria’s judicial culture has shifted. What was once condemned as misconduct is increasingly dismissed as routine. More cases appear to be influenced outside the courtroom—through visits, relationships, and political pressure—rather than argued strictly on legal merit.
Forty years ago, the Supreme Court feared that even the appearance of impropriety could erode public trust. Today, that erosion is no longer a threat. It is a reality.