Reported by: Ijeoma G | Edited by: Oravbiere Osayomore Promise.
A retired Justice of the Supreme Court, Justice Mary Odili, has explained why many petitions filed against judges in Nigeria fail to result in disciplinary action, stating that the National Judicial Council can only punish a judicial officer when allegations are backed by verifiable facts and sufficient material evidence. Speaking at the South-East Regional Security Summit held at the International Conference Centre in Umuahia, Abia State, on Thursday, July 30, 2026, the former jurist addressed growing public concerns over judicial misconduct and the perceived failure of the NJC to hold erring judges accountable. The summit was organised by the Federal Ministry of Defence and brought together key stakeholders to discuss security, justice and national stability.
Justice Odili emphasised that the NJC, under the leadership of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, attends to every petition filed against any judicial officer. However, she lamented that many complaints are submitted in what she described as "watery form" — lacking the concrete evidence and material facts required for the council to take disciplinary action. “The Chief Justice of Nigeria attends to every petition that comes against any judicial officer, but some petitions come in watery form without facts, without the material support with which that petition is to be attended to,” she said. According to her, the absence of raw evidence in petitions has been a major reason why some judges escape punishment despite serious allegations.
The retired Supreme Court Justice stressed that the NJC does not shield judicial officers found guilty of misconduct, but insisted that disciplinary proceedings must always comply with constitutional principles of due process and fairness. She noted that judges accused of wrongdoing are constitutionally entitled to a fair hearing and must be given an opportunity to respond to the claims against them. Weak or unsubstantiated allegations, she warned, allow an accused judge to successfully challenge the petition and extricate himself from condemnation. “Remember, the judge you are accusing or you think has committed an infraction has a right to fair hearing. So, he can extricate himself from the condemnation or accusations if the petition is watery and does not have the necessary facts with which it can be handled,” Odili stated.
Acknowledging that public concerns over the administration of justice have increased in recent years, with many Nigerians questioning the integrity of certain judicial decisions, Justice Odili urged aggrieved litigants, lawyers, and members of the public to channel their complaints formally through the NJC rather than leaving them to public debate or media speculation. She maintained that genuine complaints should be properly documented and supported with verifiable facts. “A lot of concerns have been raised in society about whether justice is what it should be. Some people have grouses about some judges. Please send your petitions to the National Judicial Council,” she said.
The former Justice further assured Nigerians that once a petition is verified and carries the necessary credence, the NJC will not hesitate to impose the appropriate punishment on any judicial officer found culpable. She reiterated that effective judicial accountability requires active public participation through responsible reporting of misconduct, while also protecting the independence of the judiciary from undue interference. “Once your petitions are verified and they have the necessary credence, that judge will get the necessary punishment,” she declared.
Justice Odili's remarks come at a time when the NJC has been under increasing scrutiny over its handling of petitions against judges. In June 2023, the council dismissed petitions against Justice Odili herself and 25 other judicial officers, citing reasons ranging from lack of merit and lack of diligent prosecution to withdrawal and the subject judge having retired from service. More recently, in June 2026, the NJC set up panels to probe seven judges while dismissing petitions against 26 others for similar reasons. The former Supreme Court Justice's intervention appears to be a call for better-prepared petitions, rather than a defence of judicial impunity. She maintained that the NJC has the constitutional responsibility to investigate allegations against judicial officers and impose disciplinary measures where necessary, but stressed that such powers can only be exercised where allegations are backed by reliable evidence. Her message to Nigerians was clear: if you want judges punished, come with the facts.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters News | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments