A university don, Prof. Daniel Chile, has cautioned politicians against attempts to intimidate the judiciary over its handling of political disputes.
At Moses Orshio Adasu University, Makurdi, he issued this warning in a statement on Monday.
He said judges, particularly the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho, should be allowed to discharge their responsibilities without political interference or pressure.
Chile was responding to recent criticisms by Prof. Chidi Odinkalu, a legal practitioner and human rights advocate, regarding the administration of cases at the Federal High Court.
The academic argued that attributing political motives to the Chief Judge without credible evidence could undermine public confidence in the judiciary.
He explained that assigning cases administratively is among the responsibilities of a Chief Judge and other designated judicial officers.
According to him, the fact that the process is not entirely automated does not automatically make it corrupt or politically manipulated.
“What matters is whether cases are assigned in accordance with established judicial procedures, applicable rules, competence, jurisdiction and the demands of justice,” he said.
Chile maintained that no litigant or political party had a constitutional privilege to choose the judge who would handle its case.
He urged political actors dissatisfied with judicial decisions to seek legal remedies instead of resorting to public attacks on judicial officers.
The professor described allegations that Tsoho was acting in political actors’ interests as serious, insisting that such claims must be supported by credible evidence.
He said judicial independence must be respected, irrespective of whether court decisions favoured or disadvantaged particular political interests.
Chile also encouraged the African Democratic Congress (ADC) to resolve its internal leadership crisis through lawful and transparent processes.
He said the party should address questions regarding its leadership transition, the authority of its original stakeholders, and compliance with its constitution.
According to him, issues concerning the emergence of the party’s leadership, internal negotiations, and transfer of authority require substantive legal arguments and proper documentation.
He stressed that both political and legal legitimacy must be established through transparent processes. He emphasised that both political and legal legitimacy should be established through transparent processes—arrangements whose legality remained contested.
He further cautioned against what he described as the growing tendency among political actors to attack institutions when decisions are unfavourable.l attacks and unsubstantiated allegations against judicial officers.
“If there has been a breach of judicial procedure, the appropriate institutional mechanisms should be activated.
“If there is credible evidence of misconduct, it should be presented to the competent authorities,” he said.
Chile also stated that decisions by individual judges, including Justice Peter Lifu, should be challenged through appropriate appellate processes when necessary.
He maintained that the Federal High Court belonged to Nigerians and should not be subjected to the interests of any political party or individual.
He called on the ADC to resolve its disagreements through lawful means and emphasised that the judiciary should not be treated as an extension of political struggles.
Chile said Nigeria needed an independent, disciplined and courageous judiciary, alongside political actors willing to respect the rule of law.
He urged stakeholders to allow the courts to determine disputes based on the law rather than political pressure.
