Locked Out of Justice: Abuja’s Courts Grind to a Halt Amid Judiciary Workers’ Strike
A Capital City Without Courts
ABUJA – In a capital city that is no stranger to political protests and civil disobedience, the sudden closure of the gates of major court complexes signaled something far more profound — a temporary shutdown of the judicial arm of government. On a typically busy morning at the Federal High Court, the Court of Appeal, and several other courts in Abuja, judiciary workers under the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) carried out a coordinated strike that locked out everyone — from judges to clerks, from lawyers to litigants.
This industrial action, initiated by the Abuja branch of JUSUN, is rooted in a familiar set of grievances: poor welfare, irregular salary payments, and the alleged continued breach of the constitutional provisions granting financial independence to the judiciary. These long-standing issues have resurfaced periodically, often resulting in disruptions across the nation’s justice system.
Though no violence was recorded, the images from the day — chained gates, handwritten placards, and confused onlookers — were symbolic. They offered a chilling reminder of what happens when one arm of government ceases to function, even temporarily.
A History of Broken Promises
To understand the current impasse, one must revisit earlier events in Nigeria’s judicial history. In April 2021, JUSUN launched a nationwide strike that lasted over two months. The reason then, as now, was the perceived failure of state and federal governments to implement Section 121(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which mandates financial autonomy for the judiciary. That provision reads:
“Any amount standing to the credit of the judiciary in the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the State shall be paid directly to the heads of the courts concerned.”
This clause was reinforced by Executive Order 10, signed by former President Muhammadu Buhari, which sought to operationalize this constitutional mandate. However, the order met resistance from several quarters, including some state governors, and was later struck down by the Supreme Court for procedural irregularities — not for the merit of judicial autonomy itself.
Since then, the issue has remained largely unresolved. Although there have been high-level engagements, including committees, communiqués, and negotiation attempts, the lack of tangible implementation has led to frustration among judiciary staff, culminating in sporadic strikes such as the latest one in Abuja.
Impact Beyond the Courtroom
The implications of the strike extend well beyond locked gates and empty courtrooms. In a democracy where the rule of law underpins everything from human rights to economic policy, the absence of a functioning judiciary — even temporarily — carries weighty consequences.
Legal proceedings are time-bound. For instance, Section 36(4) of the Constitution guarantees the right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time. When courts are shut, even temporarily, the fulfillment of this right is endangered. Delays may lead to the expiration of filing windows, extended periods of pre-trial detention, or unnecessary adjournments — all of which undermine public trust in the justice system.
Moreover, commercial activities tied to the judiciary — including contract enforcement, dispute resolution, and business registration — are halted, affecting not only litigants but also the broader economy. In a country with a growing informal sector and a fragile investment environment, the absence of a predictable legal framework can be detrimental.
Judicial workers play an essential role in maintaining the integrity of this system. Registrars, bailiffs, record officers, and other administrative staff form the backbone of court operations. While their grievances are not new, their role is often underappreciated — until they withdraw their services.
A Constitutional and Institutional Dilemma
The strike once again draws attention to the structural ambiguities and enforcement weaknesses surrounding judicial autonomy in Nigeria. While Sections 81(3) and 121(3) of the Constitution provide for direct charges to the Consolidated Revenue Fund for the judiciary at the federal and state levels respectively, implementation remains uneven.
Part of the challenge lies in Nigeria’s federal structure. Unlike the National Assembly or the Presidency, state governors have substantial influence over their budgets, often leaving state judiciaries financially dependent on the executive arm. This relationship contradicts the principle of separation of powers enshrined in Section 6 of the Constitution, which confers judicial powers on the courts — independent of the executive and legislature.
Attempts to reform this structure have yielded minimal results. Advocacy by civil society organizations and legal associations, including the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), has continued, yet without consistent policy follow-through.
While federal courts like those in Abuja are less vulnerable than their state counterparts, the current strike shows that even at the highest levels, institutional resilience can be tested if staff welfare and operational funding are not secured.
Moving Forward — An Unfinished Conversation
There are no easy answers to the present crisis. However, what is clear is that recurring strikes by judicial workers highlight a systemic issue that goes beyond temporary welfare concerns. The lack of genuine financial autonomy, poor working conditions, and underfunded judiciary infrastructures are part of a deeper dysfunction that, if not addressed, will continue to erode public confidence in the judiciary.
The Abuja strike may end with another round of negotiations or an interim resolution, but unless constitutional mandates are implemented in both letter and spirit, such disruptions will remain inevitable.
To break this cycle, a comprehensive reform agenda is needed. This must include:
- Immediate implementation of Sections 81(3) and 121(3) across all states.
- A legally enforceable mechanism to ensure timely disbursement of judiciary funds.
- Transparent oversight that respects judicial independence without undermining accountability.
- A national framework to address court workers’ welfare, career progression, and training.
The judiciary, often referred to as the last hope of the common man, cannot fulfill that role if it is structurally weakened. For Nigeria’s democracy to thrive, justice must not only be seen to be done — it must be seen to be accessible, uninterrupted, and institutionally protected.
As Abuja courts remain padlocked and courtrooms empty, Nigerians must ask themselves: If justice is locked out today, how soon before it is forgotten?
Latest Posts
- All Posts
- Business
- News
- News Update
- Politics
