When Justice Pays Another Master: Questioning Judicial Financial Dependence in Nigeria

By P.L. Osakwe

■ Introduction

Justice is supposed to serve the people. The courts exist not for the executive, not for the legislature, but for the ordinary citizen who comes seeking relief. In a democracy, the judiciary is not a department of government; it is an arm of government, co-equal with the executive and the legislature.

Yet in Nigeria today, the judiciary appears chained in a way that makes its independence look more like a dream than a reality. It delivers judgments, but depends on the executive to enforce them. It hears cases daily and generates revenue through filing fees and fines, but cannot control that revenue. Instead, monies from its work are routed through executive-controlled accounts. Even salaries and allowances for judges are decided and disbursed through systems controlled elsewhere.

This dependence raises a troubling question: if the judiciary works for the people, why must it pay homage to another master? Why should the courts that interpret the Constitution be reduced to financially begging the very arm of government they are meant to check?

This is not a critique for its own sake. It is a sober reflection. Because if justice is the last hope of the common man, then justice must be truly free. A judiciary bound financially to another arm is not only dependent, it is vulnerable. And a vulnerable judiciary cannot fully protect the people.

■ The Spirit of Separation of Powers.

The idea of separating powers is not Nigerian; it is global. Montesquieu, the French philosopher, argued that liberty cannot survive if legislative, executive, and judicial powers are concentrated in one hand. Nigeria, like many democracies, adopted this principle.

The legislature makes laws.
The executive implements them.
The judiciary interprets and applies them.

Each arm is designed to be independent and co-equal, not subordinate. The Constitution of Nigeria recognizes this, at least in words.

But separation is not just about theory. It must be practical. Independence is not only about robes, wigs, and lofty judgments; it is also about the simple, practical matters, who pays the judge? who enforces the order? who controls the purse?

And on these fronts, the Nigerian judiciary often appears not independent, but dependent.

■ How Nigerian Judges Are Paid.

In recent years, Nigerian judges received a significant salary increase, in some cases by as much as 300%. The Chief Justice of Nigeria and justices of the Supreme Court are now among the better-paid public officials in the country. The Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) recommends salaries, and the National Assembly approves them.

This is progress. For years, judges were underpaid despite the weight of their responsibilities. Now, their pay has improved. But pay alone is not independence. Because the very fact that salaries must be debated, allocated, and released by the executive-legislature pipeline highlights a structural weakness.

A judge may earn well on paper, but if salaries or allowances are delayed, the judiciary can do nothing on its own. It must wait, like a civil servant waits for government release. In such a system, the judiciary, which should be a pillar of democracy, becomes financially vulnerable.

■ Where Filing Fees and Judicial Revenues Go.

Every day, Nigerians file cases in court. They pay filing fees, penalties, fines, and other administrative charges. Collectively, these sums run into billions of naira annually. One would assume that these revenues go directly to the judiciary, since they are generated by judicial services.

But in practice, they do not.

These revenues are paid into the Consolidated Revenue Fund at federal or state level, controlled by the executive. The Constitution itself recognizes financial autonomy for the judiciary, sections 81(3), 121(3), and 162(9) provide that judicial funding should be a “first-line charge” on the Consolidated Fund. In other words, the money should go directly to the judiciary, bypassing executive control.

But in reality, executive ministries of finance still act as gatekeepers. Court revenues are pooled into government accounts. From there, allocations are made back to the judiciary, often smaller than expected, sometimes delayed.

The result is that courts are left struggling for infrastructure, books, technology, and even basic staff welfare. Judges preside in poorly equipped courtrooms. Registrars strike for unpaid allowances. Case files go missing because there is no modern case management system. All this in a judiciary that, ironically, generates its own revenue daily.

It is a paradox: the judiciary is both a generator of funds and the poorest arm of government.

■ Why the Judiciary Appears Helpless.

The judiciary is often described as a “toothless bulldog.” This is unfair, because the judiciary is not toothless, it is restrained. But the effect is the same: helplessness.

1. Enforcement Dependence

When a court gives judgment, it has no independent marshal to enforce it. It must rely on the police, the sheriff of the court, or security agencies, all of which answer to the executive. If the executive drags its feet, enforcement stalls. This dependence undermines the dignity of the court.

2. Financial Dependence

Even though the judiciary generates revenue, it cannot spend without executive allocation. Filing fees vanish into consolidated funds. Budgetary releases are filtered through ministries. Judges may wear robes of authority, but in financial matters they must bow to another master.

3. Administrative Weakness

Because funding is controlled externally, the judiciary cannot freely employ staff, maintain facilities, or upgrade technology. Court registries often function as if trapped in the 1970s. The helplessness here is not laziness; it is structural dependence.

■ Why This Matters to the People.

The judiciary does not exist for the executive. It exists for the people. It is the ordinary Nigerian who comes to court to fight for land, to seek justice for abuse, or to challenge wrongful dismissal. When the judiciary is weak, it is the citizen who suffers.

If court orders cannot be enforced independently, people begin to see judgments as mere paper. If the judiciary cannot control its own funds, people begin to doubt whether it can stand firm against political pressure. If judges must look to the executive for releases, then the balance of power tilts, and separation of powers becomes a shadow of itself.

For the people, a judiciary that pays another master is no longer fully theirs.

■ A Show of Concern, Not Critique

It is important to be clear: this is not an attack on government. Salaries have been increased. Executive Order 10 attempted to enforce financial autonomy, even if its implementation has been challenged. Efforts are being made.

But concern remains. Because independence is not about salary increments alone. Independence is about structure. If justice is to be the hope of the common man, then justice must not depend on the goodwill of another arm.

■ Practical Solutions

If Nigeria is serious about strengthening democracy, it must give the judiciary not just respect, but independence. Here are some practical steps:

1. Judicial Marshal Service

Establish an independent enforcement arm under the National Judicial Council, tasked with executing judgments, serving court orders, and maintaining court security. This would free the courts from reliance on executive-controlled police.

2. Direct Financial Autonomy

Filing fees and court revenues should be retained by the judiciary for infrastructure, technology, and staff development. This would make the courts self-sustaining and reduce dependency.

3. First-Line Charge Implementation

Enforce constitutional provisions that guarantee judiciary funding as a direct first-line charge, paid directly to the heads of courts or the NJC. This bypasses executive bottlenecks.

4. Professionalization of Sheriffs

Reform the office of the Sheriff of the Court into a professional enforcement agency, independent of executive influence.

5. Transparent Budgeting

Judicial independence must go hand in hand with accountability. Court revenues and expenditures should be publicly reported, showing Nigerians that justice is not only independent but responsible.

6. Stakeholder Cooperation

Reform should not be seen as rivalry between arms of government. It should be embraced as cooperation for balance, because a stronger judiciary strengthens democracy for all.

■ My Reflections

Sometimes, the problem is not that the judiciary is weak, but that it is treated as if it must depend. Yet the judiciary is the one arm that holds the scale of justice. If it is poor, the people become poorer in their rights.

A judge may sit in robes, but if the court’s generator has no fuel, justice is delayed. A citizen may win a landmark judgment, but if enforcement depends on executive will, justice is denied. A lawyer may pay high filing fees, but if those fees go elsewhere, the courts remain underfunded.

To me, this is not just administrative mismanagement; it is symbolic. It says to the people: “The judiciary works for you, but answers to another.” And that symbolism is dangerous. Because democracy only works when all arms of government stand truly independent, each serving the people directly.
The judiciary should not be poor. It should not beg. It should not depend. Because when justice depends, the people lose.

■ Conclusion

The Nigerian judiciary is not meant to be a servant of the executive. It is meant to be a servant of the people. Yet by financial structure, it remains chained to another arm. Filing fees vanish into consolidated funds. Salaries are decided and released elsewhere. Court orders are enforced by executive-controlled agents.
This is not separation of powers. It is separation in name only. It is not checks and balances; it is imbalance. Some might even call it judicial slavery.

If we care about democracy, we must care about this. Because a judiciary that pays another master cannot fully protect the people.

The way forward is not hostility but reform. Let the judiciary retain its revenues. Let it enforce its judgments independently. Let it be accountable directly to the people it serves. Only then will the promise of separation of powers be more than theory. Only then will Nigerians believe again that justice truly belongs to them.