Centre for Contemporary Studies (CCS)
Abuja-Nigeria
The recent intervention by legal practitioner and human rights advocate, Hamza N. Dantani Esq., regarding the ongoing case involving former Kaduna State Governor, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, raises important questions about public confidence in the administration of justice and the perception of judicial impartiality in Nigeria.
At the Centre for Contemporary Studies (CCS), we believe that the strength of any democratic society rests significantly on the independence, integrity, and credibility of its judiciary. While courts possess unquestionable authority to determine matters before them according to law, it is equally important that judicial proceedings inspire confidence among litigants and the wider public.
Dantani's assertion centres on a fundamental legal principle that has guided judicial systems across democratic societies for generations: justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done. This principle recognises that public trust in the judiciary is as important as the correctness of judicial decisions themselves.
The concerns raised by the defence regarding alleged bias, together with repeated refusals of bail in circumstances where the offences are generally considered bailable, have inevitably generated public debate and scrutiny. Whether such concerns are ultimately justified is a matter for the judicial process to determine. However, the existence of a reasonable perception of possible bias among members of the public cannot simply be ignored.
It is important to emphasise that the issue is not necessarily whether the presiding judge is actually biased. Judicial recusal is often considered not because wrongdoing has been established, but because maintaining confidence in the integrity of the judicial process may require avoiding situations that create an appearance of partiality.
The discretion to grant or refuse bail is undoubtedly vested in the court. Nevertheless, such discretion must always be exercised judicially and judiciously, taking into account established legal considerations, including the presumption of innocence, the seriousness of the charges, the likelihood of interference with witnesses, and the possibility of the accused absconding.
In the present case, supporters of the call for recusal argue that Mallam El-Rufai's public profile, established residence, and voluntary return to Nigeria from abroad may weigh against the suggestion that he constitutes a flight risk. These arguments deserve careful consideration within the framework of the law and established judicial precedent.
The Centre for Contemporary Studies maintains that the judiciary must remain visibly independent from political influence, whether real or perceived. In periods of heightened political tension, courts bear an even greater responsibility to demonstrate neutrality and fairness. Public confidence is best preserved when judicial officers are seen to act in a manner that removes any reasonable doubt about their impartiality.
Consequently, CCS views Dantani's recommendation as a legitimate contribution to public discourse on judicial accountability and transparency. A voluntary recusal, where circumstances warrant and where public confidence may be strengthened, should not be interpreted as an admission of bias or misconduct. Rather, it can be regarded as a statesmanlike step aimed at protecting the credibility of the judicial institution and ensuring that all parties enjoy the constitutional guarantee of a fair hearing.
Ultimately, the objective must be the preservation of the rule of law. Regardless of the outcome of the case, Nigerians must be assured that the proceedings are conducted by a court whose independence and impartiality are beyond question. Such confidence is indispensable to democratic governance, constitutionalism, and the continued legitimacy of the justice system.
The Centre for Contemporary Studies therefore supports all lawful measures that strengthen public trust in the judiciary and uphold the constitutional principles of fairness, due process, and equal justice under the law.
CCS LEGAL DESK
July 25, 2026 (161 Days)
Tags
Opinion