 |
| Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN, President, Nigerian Bar Association |
ABUJA — The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has expressed deep concern over what it described as the growing trend of excessive and unrealistic bail conditions imposed by courts and law enforcement agencies across the country, warning that such practices undermine the constitutional right to liberty and defeat the purpose of bail.
In a statement issued by the President of the NBA, , the association said the increasing insistence on sureties who are senior civil servants and the requirement for landed properties of extraordinary value have effectively turned bail into a tool of pre-trial detention rather than a mechanism for securing attendance at trial.
The NBA noted that many defendants who are constitutionally presumed innocent remain in detention despite being granted bail because the conditions attached to their release are practically impossible to meet.
According to the association, bail is a constitutional safeguard intended to preserve the liberty of accused persons while ensuring their appearance in court. It stressed that bail should never be used as a form of punishment or as an indirect means of incarceration before conviction.
The statement cited the case of Suleman & Anor v. Commissioner of Police, Plateau State (2008), where the Supreme Court held that the purpose of bail pending trial is to grant temporary freedom to an accused person whose attendance in court can be secured through reasonable conditions.
The NBA further criticised the growing practice of requiring sureties who are serving public officers on Grade Levels 16 and 17 and who possess properties worth hundreds of millions of naira. It described such conditions as unrealistic and disconnected from the country's prevailing economic realities.
The association also referenced the decision of the Dasuki v. Director-General, State Security Service & Ors (2019) case, in which the Court of Appeal condemned the mandatory use of senior public servants as sureties. The court reportedly observed that such requirements are largely unknown in modern legal systems and may conflict with public service regulations and anti-corruption objectives.
According to the NBA, Section 165(1) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015, empowers courts to impose bail conditions but expressly provides that such conditions must not be excessive. The association argued that judicial discretion must always be exercised reasonably and in accordance with constitutional guarantees.
The legal body warned that bail conditions that are impossible to fulfil amount, in practical terms, to a refusal of bail and contribute significantly to prolonged pre-trial detention and overcrowding in correctional facilities.
It also questioned the rationale behind restricting acceptable sureties to a particular category of citizens, especially senior civil servants, noting that there is no legal or empirical basis for assuming they are more reliable than other law-abiding Nigerians.
The NBA therefore called on courts across the country to ensure that bail conditions remain fair, proportionate, and attainable. It urged judicial officers to uphold the constitutional presumption of innocence and avoid imposing requirements that render bail meaningless.
The association reaffirmed that bail should remain a mechanism for securing attendance at trial while protecting the liberty and dignity of persons who have not been convicted of any offence.
"Bail should not become a privilege reserved only for those with extraordinary means or connections," the NBA said, adding that the justice system must ensure that the right to bail remains practical, meaningful, and accessible to all citizens.
