By Oluwatosin Emmanuel
In every civilized society, the courtroom stands as more than a physical space—it is a sacred institution where justice is not only done but must be seen to be done. The recent incident at the Federal High Court involving Honourable Justice Mohammed Umar and legal practitioner Marshall Abubakar has ignited a necessary and urgent conversation about professionalism, judicial authority, and the dignity of the legal system in Nigeria.
At the heart of this controversy lies a troubling directive: a judge ordering a lawyer to kneel in court. This act, widely condemned by the Nigerian Bar Association under the leadership of Afam Osigwe, raises a fundamental question; when does judicial authority cross into judicial overreach?
The Courtroom: A Temple, Not a Theatre of Humiliation
The courtroom is often described as a “temple of justice,” a phrase rooted in centuries of legal tradition. This metaphor is not poetic exaggeration; it reflects the expectation that proceedings within its walls are governed by law, reason, and dignity.
Legal philosopher Lord Hewart famously declared:
“Justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.”
Ordering a legal practitioner to kneel introduces an element of public humiliation that undermines this principle. It transforms the courtroom from a forum of justice into a stage of personal authority.
Judicial Powers and Their Constitutional Limits
Under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, courts are vested with authority to maintain order and punish for contempt. However, this power is neither absolute nor arbitrary.
Section 36 of the Constitution guarantees the right to fair hearing; this includes dignity, impartiality, and due process. Contempt proceedings, especially, must follow clearly defined procedures:
The alleged contemnor must be informed of the charge
Given an opportunity to respond
Judged without bias or emotional reaction
Legal scholar A. V. Dicey emphasized the supremacy of law over arbitrary power:
“No man is punishable except for a distinct breach of law established in the ordinary legal manner before the ordinary courts.”
A directive to kneel does not exist within any statutory or procedural framework in Nigerian law. It is, therefore, not just irregular; it is unlawful.
The Ethics of the Bench: Power with Restraint
Judges are custodians of justice, not enforcers of personal discipline. The Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers in Nigeria demands:
- Patience
- Courtesy
- Self-control
As Benjamin N. Cardozo wisely noted:
“The judge is not a knight-errant roaming at will in pursuit of his own ideal of beauty or of goodness.”
This quote underscores a crucial point: judicial authority must be guided by law, not emotion.
The Bar Is Not Without Responsibility
While the judge’s conduct has drawn rightful criticism, the legal profession itself is not absolved of responsibility. Lawyers are officers of the court and must exhibit discipline even under provocation.
The Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners in Nigeria require:
- Respect for the court
- Controlled advocacy
- Professional decorum
As Nelson Mandela once reflected on the legal profession:
“A good lawyer is not only an advocate but a custodian of justice.”
Raising one’s voice or disrupting proceedings, even in the pursuit of justice, can erode the very system lawyers are sworn to protect.
When Institutions Collide: The Bar vs The Bench
The relationship between the Bar and the Bench is delicate but foundational. It is built on mutual respect; not fear, not intimidation.
The intervention of the Nigerian Bar Association signals more than a professional disagreement; it reflects an institutional alarm. When such boundaries are crossed, the ripple effects extend beyond the individuals involved; they threaten public confidence in the justice system.
A Pattern or an Exception?
This incident is not occurring in isolation. Across jurisdictions, concerns have been raised about judicial temperament and the misuse of contempt powers. In Nigeria, similar controversies have occasionally surfaced, pointing to a deeper issue; the need for continuous judicial training and accountability.
As Roscoe Pound observed:
“Law must be stable, yet it cannot stand still.”
The legal system must evolve; not only in statutes but in conduct.
The Way Forward: Restoring Dignity and Trust
To preserve the sanctity of the legal system, the following steps are essential:
1. Strict Adherence to Due Process
Contempt proceedings must follow established legal procedures; nothing more, nothing less.
2. Judicial Accountability
Bodies such as the National Judicial Council (NJC) must ensure that complaints are investigated transparently.
3. Professional Discipline at the Bar
Lawyers must continue to uphold decorum, even in tense courtroom situations.
4. Continuous Legal Education
Both judges and lawyers should undergo regular training on ethics, emotional intelligence, and courtroom management.
Conclusion: Law Above Personal Power
The incident at the Federal High Court serves as a sobering reminder: the strength of the legal system lies not in the power of its actors but in their submission to the law.
Humiliation has no place in justice. Authority must never eclipse legality. And professionalism must never be sacrificed on the altar of ego.
Until these principles are upheld, the temple of justice risks becoming a monument to misplaced power; a disgrace not just to the profession, but to the nation itself.
“Where law ends, tyranny begins.” — John Locke
