ABUJA—The Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (BOSAN) has expressed deep concern over the rising trend of contradictory rulings coming out of the Supreme Court, describing the situation as troubling and damaging to the justice system.
The association made this known during a special court session marking the commencement of the 2025/2026 legal year at the apex court. Speaking on behalf of the body, Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, explained that BOSAN has, since 2012, consistently documented and flagged the dangers posed by conflicting decisions, both at the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.
According to him, the issue remains unresolved despite repeated calls for harmonisation. He cited instances where contradictions have unsettled the interpretation of law, especially in cases concerning the competence of Originating Processes signed in the name of law firms.
Olanipekun recalled how the matter was settled in the landmark case of Okafor v. Nweke—and reaffirmed in FBN v. Maiwada, where he appeared as amicus curiae. Yet, he pointed out that subsequent judgments such as Olowe v. Aluko (May 23, 2025), which took a more liberal stance, and Menakaya v. Ezim, delivered just weeks later but reverting to the earlier strict interpretation, have reignited the controversy.
“While it is true that judges are human and may err, the doctrine of judicial precedent is fundamental and must not be undermined,” he said, stressing the confusion such inconsistencies create for legal practitioners, lower courts, and the public.
BOSAN proposed that the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) convene a joint panel of justices from the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, and senior members of the Bar to thoroughly review and reconcile conflicting judgments. The body disclosed that it had previously submitted reports highlighting cases needing harmonisation, and has now set up a fresh committee to update its records for the Supreme Court’s attention.
The association further warned that the prevailing practice, where courts selectively apply either the latest or earlier conflicting decisions without expressly overruling the other, has led to what it described as a “cacophonous principle” of judicial uncertainty.
At the same event, which also featured the swearing-in of 57 new Senior Advocates of Nigeria, the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, expressed worry over corruption allegations against judges. He noted that inconsistent rulings and perceived external influence have severely dented public confidence in the judiciary.
Fagbemi emphasized that justice must be delivered with transparency, consistency, and intellectual depth, insisting that the judiciary must be above suspicion. “The strength of the judiciary lies not in the number of its rulings, but in the clarity, coherence, and courage they reflect,” he stated.
He further disclosed that his office had commenced investigations into a property dispute in the United Kingdom involving a senior lawyer, promising to refer the matter to appropriate disciplinary authorities.
Similarly, the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), through its President, Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN, criticized the politicization of judicial appointments, describing the process as lacking in objectivity and transparency. He warned that political interference in the selection of judges compromises judicial independence and erodes public trust.
The NBA maintained that judicial appointments must be based strictly on integrity, competence, and proper legal qualifications, warning that poor-quality recruitment remains the greatest threat to the justice system.
In her remarks, the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, highlighted reforms introduced under her watch, including the automation of some Supreme Court operations and improvements in case management.
She disclosed that during the 2024/2025 legal year, which ended on July 18, the court handled 2,280 matters, consisting of 1,720 motions and 560 appeals. Out of these, a total of 369 judgments were delivered.
Justice Kekere-Ekun described the figures as evidence of the court’s determination to ensure timely justice delivery, while also pledging her commitment to broader reforms across the judiciary.
