Constitutional lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mike Ozekhome, has sharply criticised the Supreme Court for breaching constitutional provisions by delivering judgment 167 days after hearing final arguments in a controversial murder case. Ozekhome described the delay as a grave judicial error, pointing out that the Nigerian Constitution mandates that all judgments be delivered within 90 days of the conclusion of arguments.
The case in question involves Sunday Jackson, a Christian farmer from Adamawa State, who was sentenced to death by hanging for allegedly killing a herdsman, Ardo Bawuro, during a violent encounter on his farmland over a decade ago. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction on March 7, 2025, triggering widespread outrage and reigniting debates over land rights, religious identity, and the right to self-defense in Nigeria’s volatile Middle Belt region.
According to Ozekhome, the Supreme Court’s ruling is deeply flawed; not only for its procedural delay but also for what he termed a lack of judicial empathy and contextual understanding. He argued that Jackson had acted in self-defense when he was attacked by the herdsman, noting that the court failed to consider the broader pattern of violent confrontations between farmers and herders, which often result in deadly outcomes.
Read also:
- Supreme Court revokes Fred Ajudua’s bail in $1.43m fraud trial
- Supreme Court lifts 5 year ban on Imo Attorney General, Akaolisa
- PDP South-East Zonal Chairman congratulates Anyanwu, hails Supreme court ruling
The prominent SAN questioned the legitimacy of a judgment delivered well beyond the constitutional time frame, warning that such precedents undermine public trust in the judiciary and cast a shadow over the sanctity of justice in Nigeria. He stated that the delay alone should have rendered the judgment unconstitutional and null, regardless of the facts of the case.
Ozekhome’s strong condemnation of the ruling adds to the growing public discourse around the judiciary’s role in cases involving vulnerable communities. The verdict has drawn attention not only to the specifics of Jackson’s conviction but also to systemic issues of delayed justice, marginalisation, and the need for urgent judicial reforms.