When Power Trumps Law: The Distortion of Civil Justice in Nigeria

By P.L. Osakwe

"What is illegal remains illegal — no matter who desires it, decrees it, or benefits from it."

I. Introduction: The Dangerous Drift

Nigeria is fast becoming a country where the law bows to personalities, and procedure is subject to position. The lines separating public office from personal interest have blurred beyond recognition. More dangerously, public officers, including the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), now act as though their power extends to all matters, civil or criminal, personal or national. But this is not only a constitutional distortion; it is a democratic tragedy.

The latest trend is the attempted or actual interference of the AGF in civil cases, cases that are purely between individuals, institutions, or corporations. The law is clear: the AGF’s constitutional powers, no matter how broad, do not extend to stopping civil proceedings. Yet we have seen Attorney-Generals (state and federal alike) issue letters, file notices, or even instruct parties to withdraw civil suits in the name of "public interest."

II. The AGF's Powers Under Nigerian Law

To properly analyze the abuse, we must first be clear on the lawful powers of the Attorney-General.

Section 174(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) provides:

"The Attorney-General of the Federation shall have power:
(a) to institute and undertake criminal proceedings against any person before any court of law in Nigeria...
(b) to take over and continue any such criminal proceedings...
(c) to discontinue at any stage before judgment is delivered any such criminal proceedings..."

Every clause in this section refers explicitly to criminal proceedings. It makes no reference, implication, or assumption that the AGF may interfere in civil litigation. Civil matters fall under different rules, governed by procedural laws and the constitutionally guaranteed independence of the judiciary.

There is no provision in the Nigerian Constitution that gives any Attorney-General the right to discontinue a civil case.

Despite this, powerful public officers have developed a culture of using the weight of their office to interfere, delay, or sabotage justice in purely civil matters. They do this under various pretenses:

□ Claiming the matter affects national security or interest;
□ Stating that a government agency is involved and must not be embarrassed;
□ Using "executive override" to protect politically exposed persons or allies;

Claiming immunity or sovereign privilege where none exists.

These justifications are as unconstitutional as they are dangerous.

III. What Are Civil Matters?

Civil litigation refers to non-criminal disputes between private parties, which may include individuals, corporations, government entities, or institutions. The scope includes:

● Breach of contract
● Tort (e.g., defamation, negligence)
● Land disputes
● Commercial disputes
● Debt recovery
● Family and inheritance matters

Unlike criminal law, which is concerned with offenses against the state and is prosecuted in the name of the government, civil law is primarily about remedies for wrongs done between parties.

Even when a government agency is sued, it becomes a defendant, not a regulator of the proceedings. It has no right to unilaterally discontinue or nullify the civil action. Only a competent court of law may determine the suit.

Any interference by an AGF or other executive officeholder in such civil cases amounts to executive lawlessness and contempt of court.

IV. The Doctrine of Separation of Powers

At the heart of democratic governance is the doctrine of separation of powers. This doctrine is enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution, which delineates the powers and responsibilities of the Executive, Legislature, and Judiciary.

The principle demands that:

□ The Legislature makes laws;

□ The Executive implements laws;

□ The Judiciary interprets laws.

The AGF, as part of the Executive, has no right to encroach on judicial processes in civil matters. When this separation is violated, when an AGF attempts to halt civil proceedings, intimidate judges, or influence outcomes, the rule of law collapses.

The arrogation of civil judicial powers to the executive is a form of legal authoritarianism. It not only offends constitutional order but erodes the legitimacy of the justice system.

V. Consequences of Executive Interference in Civil Justice

The consequences of this distortion of civil justice are far-reaching:
■ Erosion of judicial independence: Judges may be coerced or pressured into dismissing legitimate suits.
■ Public distrust: Citizens lose faith in the courts when powerful individuals manipulate the process.
■ Denial of remedies: Victims of civil wrongs may never get justice when cases are aborted by executive fiat.
■ Weakening of institutions: The judiciary becomes subservient, and the executive becomes untouchable.
■ Encouragement of impunity: Once people in power realize they can escape civil liability, they become more reckless.

VI. Notable Cases and Emerging Patterns

Nigeria has witnessed several instances where AGFs, or even governors, interfered in civil disputes. In some cases, petitioners were coerced into withdrawing suits. In others, official letters were sent to courts, claiming overriding state interest or requesting stays of proceedings.

In 2021, a State AG reportedly intervened in a land dispute between a private citizen and a state agency, threatening the petitioner with criminal charges unless the case was dropped. In another disturbing case, a federal AGF allegedly requested the discontinuation of a contractual enforcement suit, citing the potential embarrassment to the government.

These actions, though not widely reported, are becoming normalized — especially when political interests or powerful actors are involved.

VII. The Way Forward: Reclaiming Civil Justice

Restoring faith in the civil justice system requires both legal clarity and political courage. Several urgent reforms are necessary:

1. Judicial Enforcement of Boundaries
Courts must rise to the occasion and reject any executive attempt to interfere in civil litigation. Judges should not entertain letters, memos, or communications from executive officers attempting to sway proceedings.

2. Legal Activism and Public Interest Litigation
Civil society organizations and public interest lawyers must challenge unlawful interventions by the AGF or other public officers. Judicial pronouncements must reaffirm the limits of executive power.

3. Legislative Amendment and Oversight
The National Assembly should consider express statutory clarifications affirming that AGF powers are limited to criminal prosecution. Oversight committees must monitor abuses of office by public legal officers.

4. Professional Sanctions
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) must take disciplinary action against any lawyer, including AGFs, who uses their position to sabotage civil justice.

5. Public Accountability and Transparency
Citizens must be educated on their rights. Any executive interference in civil cases should be exposed, documented, and resisted through legitimate civic means.

VIII. Conclusion: The Law Must Stand Alone

Civil justice is a pillar of democracy. It is the arena where citizens seek redress not with force, but with law. It must not be subject to manipulation, intimidation, or interference, no matter how highly placed the actor.

Nigeria cannot build a nation on the shifting sands of executive arbitrariness. If public officers can silence a civil case with a letter, or abort a legal process with a threat, then we no longer have law, we have power. And when power trumps law, tyranny is born.

It is time to return to first principles.
Let the courts be courts.
Let the law be law.
Let the Attorney-General return to his proper constitutional lane.

Because what is illegal, remains illegal, no matter who desires it.