Within the framework of administering criminal justice, bail proceedings in Nigeria hold significant importance. Nonetheless, a substantial impediment pervades the court system across all tiers within the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Primarily, judges occasionally set excessively stringent bail conditions.
It is imperative to address the procedural challenges surrounding the selection of sureties for defendants in court, particularly in light of the provisions outlined in the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015. This Act emphasizes the role of blood relatives as sureties, presumably due to their perceived ability to ensure the defendant’s presence during court proceedings. However, this requirement often presents practical difficulties, as demonstrated in the case of Col. Sambo Dasuki v. Director General, State Security Service, where appointing a civil servant as a surety was deemed incompatible with Public Service Rules.
The imposition of stringent bail conditions not only creates barriers for defendants but also fosters a reliance on professional sureties, exacerbating financial burdens for the accused. Consequently, individuals who may themselves be victims or innocent bystanders are unjustly incarcerated due to their inability to meet these onerous conditions. This unjust situation has led to a concerning number of individuals languishing in prison unnecessarily.
Moreover, the repercussions extend beyond individuals to encompass businesses, as proprietors are detained awaiting trial, leading to the closure of their businesses. Such outcomes highlight the urgent need for reform in the areas highlighted above. A reassessment of the criteria for selecting sureties, along with a reconsideration of bail conditions, is essential to ensure a fair and just legal system that upholds the rights of defendants while safeguarding the public interest.
At times, one questions whether judicial officers truly consider the profound ramifications of remanding a defendant in prison. Such a decision can ripple through a defendant’s life, affecting their children’s education, causing hunger within their household, halting ongoing business endeavours, and even impacting the ability of spouses to cover medical expenses after childbirth due to the absence of financial support while their partners are detained. Our administration of the criminal justice system urgently requires a pragmatic approach that incorporates empathy into its operations. I advocate for the integration of social welfare officers within every criminal court to infuse empathy into the system’s workings.
The current functioning of the criminal justice system appears inherently flawed. Countless individuals, including some who are innocent, have suffered and perished in prison due to inadequate healthcare and prolonged detention. Prison should only be a recourse when absolutely necessary. In contrast to our system, where securing bail can be an arduous ordeal, in many other countries, including for serious crimes like murder, obtaining bail is a routine matter. While ensuring proper documentation to prevent bail jumping is crucial in Nigeria, individuals should ideally return home on the same day they are arraigned. Achieving this requires an expansion of our court systems and the recruitment of additional court registrars.
Another concerning aspect of our judicial process is the practice of assigning the prosecution to verify sureties. This practice contradicts the principle of impartiality, as it entails a party involved in the case conducting assessments that should be the court’s responsibility. It is unjust and illogical. Hence, I propose that verifications of sureties be handled solely by the court registry to prevent potential abuse of power by the prosecution.
The bail process in Nigeria, being a court procedure, should not be subject to manipulation or obstruction by prosecuting agencies in response to defence attorneys advocating for their client’s rights. However, the reality often proves otherwise, particularly at the Federal High Court, where the post-bail verification process can stretch on for weeks or even months due to bureaucratic inefficiencies. This results in undue suffering for defendants, some of whom have tragically succumbed to the dire conditions of correctional facilities while awaiting the resolution of their cases.
The cumbersome bail process and excessive bail conditions in Nigeria which are prevalent in the Federal High Court raise constitutional concerns regarding the infringement of citizens’ rights to liberty, freedom of movement, and access to justice as enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution. As the Federal High Court plays a pivotal role in interpreting fundamental human rights, its operational procedures should reflect a commitment to upholding citizens’ rights and ensuring timely justice delivery.
Justice delayed is tantamount to justice denied, and we must not shy away from the challenge of effecting meaningful change within our justice system. Such change is essential for safeguarding the rights and well-being of present and future generations, and failure to address these issues perpetuates injustice and undermines the very fabric of our society.