By Solomon OKPO
The Administration of Criminal Justice Law (ACJL) was designed to modernise Nigeria’s criminal justice system, reduce delays, protect defendants’ rights, and restore public confidence.
Yet, years after its adoption across several states including Akwa Ibom, one stubborn obstacle continues to undermine its promise: jurisdiction. Until the ACJL Working Group confronts this issue head-on, justice will remain procedural, not substantive.
“Jurisdiction is not a technical footnote in law; it is the gatekeeper of justice”, says chairman, Fmr DCP Udoh.
It determines which court hears a case, which law applies, and whether a matter lives or dies before it is even examined on merit. In Nigeria today, jurisdiction has become a weapon of delay rather than a tool of order. Lawyers exploit it, courts wrestle with it, and litigants suffer from it. This is not accidental, it is systemic.
The ACJL Working Group must admit an uncomfortable truth: the current jurisdictional framework reflects an outdated legal culture obsessed with form over fairness. Cases are routinely struck out, not because justice has been done, but because the “wrong” court was approached. Victims are sent back to square one. Defendants languish in detention. The public watches, disillusioned, as justice collapses under its own technicalities.
This reality directly contradicts the spirit of the ACJL. The law was enacted to ensure speedy trial, reduce pre-trial detention, and prevent abuse of process. Yet jurisdictional objections, often raised late and tactically have become a convenient escape route for those seeking to frustrate proceedings.
When a criminal trial runs for years only to be terminated on jurisdictional grounds, the system has failed, regardless of how elegant the legal reasoning may be.
The Working Group’s role, therefore, is not ceremonial.
It is reformist. It must push for a jurisdictional rethink that prioritises substance over ritual. Courts should be empowered to transfer matters seamlessly rather than strike them out. Jurisdictional objections should be resolved early and decisively, not weaponised midstream. Above all, jurisdiction must serve justice, not defeat it.
Nigeria’s justice system does not suffer from a lack of laws; it suffers from a lack of courage to interpret and apply them progressively. The ACJL provides the legal backbone for reform, but without a bold jurisdictional overhaul, it will remain another well-intentioned statute trapped in old habits.
The Working Group must choose its legacy. It can either preserve a system where technical objections triumph over truth, or champion a justice architecture where jurisdiction facilitates accountability and closure.
In a society grappling with crime, insecurity, and public distrust in institutions, neutrality is not an option. Silence is complicity.
If justice must work, jurisdiction must change. The ACJL Working Group should lead that change, decisively, unapologetically, and now.
* Solomon OKPO, is an executive member of the ACJL, State working Committee/Head, Media Visibility.
