Oahimire Omone Precious | Edited by: Gabriel Osa
Abuja, Nigeria — The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, has clarified that judges will remain exempt from the federal government’s directive withdrawing police guards from very important persons (VIPs), assuring the judiciary that its officers will continue to receive essential protection despite recent confusion and concerns within the legal community.
The assurance came amid anxiety among members of the judiciary following reports that police orderlies attached to some judges had been abruptly withdrawn in parts of the country, including in Taraba State. Justice Kekere-Ekun’s office underscored that although the presidency and the Nigeria Police Force have emphasised the need to redeploy officers away from VIP-guard duties to bolster national security, judges and other judicial officers were intentionally left out of the withdrawal directive due to their unique role in upholding the rule of law.
The presidential directive, reiterated this week by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, called for the withdrawal of police officers serving as close-in guards for ministers, lawmakers and other public figures, with a view to redirecting manpower to critical security operations across the country. The directive has been justified by authorities as part of efforts to address rising insecurity and ensure that limited security resources are deployed where most needed.
However, the withdrawal of police orderlies attached to judicial officers in some states sparked immediate concern among top judges. The Chief Judge of Taraba State, Justice Joel Agya, publicly lamented that the sudden removal of police orderlies — separate from agents deployed for courtroom duty — exposed judicial officers to significant personal risk and could undermine judicial independence. He specifically warned that judges handling sensitive matters such as political, terrorism, corruption and criminal cases might face intimidation or security threats without dedicated protection.
Reacting to the concerns, the CJN’s media aide, Tobi Soniyi, emphasised that the presidency’s order explicitly exempts judges and governors from the withdrawal of police protection. He expressed puzzlement over why the attachments of police orderlies to certain judges were removed without prior notice, given the recognised legal entitlement of judicial figures to protective details.
Legal experts note that judges occupy a uniquely vulnerable position in Nigeria’s judicial process, often presiding over high-profile cases with national security, corruption and political overtones. Protection for judges and courtroom officials has long been regarded as essential to safeguard judicial independence and the integrity of the justice system, enabling the impartial administration of law free from fear or undue influence.
The police withdrawal directive, first implemented earlier in the year with a focus on reducing routine guard duties and freeing up officers for core policing functions, has been controversial since its announcement. Critics have argued that while the reallocation of security personnel is understandable against a backdrop of mounting security challenges, blanket orders risk leaving key public servants exposed and could erode confidence in institutional safety.
In reiterating the exemption for judges, the CJN’s clarification helps quell fears that judicial officers might be left unprotected while engaging in official duties or moving in public spaces. It also affirms the broader principle that security arrangements for judicial officers safeguard not just individuals but the rule of law itself, ensuring that judges can hear cases without threat or harassment.
Observers say the episode highlights the delicate balance Nigeria’s leadership must maintain in reshaping security deployments. On one hand, there is an ongoing push to streamline police resources and focus on pressing public safety concerns such as insurgency, kidnapping and banditry; on the other, there is a constitutional imperative to uphold protections that preserve judicial independence and confidence in the justice system.
Some state judiciary leaders have called for improved communication between the Nigeria Police Force, the judiciary and government offices to prevent misunderstanding and ensure that exemptions are respected in practice. They argue that clear protocols are essential, particularly when changes in security policy affect multiple arms of government.
As the directive continues to be implemented, authorities have emphasised that judges and key judicial personnel will maintain access to police protection when necessary, and that any adjustments to security assignments will be handled transparently and in consultation with the judiciary.
The clarification by the CJN has been welcomed by judicial associations and rights advocates who argue that a secure environment is fundamental to the effective functioning of courts and the broader justice sector. With continued dialogue between security agencies and judicial leadership, stakeholders hope that operational concerns can be addressed while aligning with the nation’s security priorities.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments