Introduction
The Federal Republic of Nigeria operates under a constitution that explicitly establishes a federal system of government. This framework provides for a division of governmental powers between the central (federal) government and the constituent states. As the essay question suggests, this division is relatively clear in the legislative and executive arms of government. The legislature is bicameral at the federal level and unicameral at the state level, with powers distributed through exclusive, concurrent, and residual lists. Similarly, the executive authority is divided between the President at the federal level and Governors at the state level. This essay will argue that the assertion that "the same cannot be said about the Judiciary" is an accurate assessment of Nigeria's constitutional structure. While federalism implies a dual court system, Nigeria operates what is more accurately described as an integrated and unified judicial system, where state courts are intertwined with and subordinate to a federal hierarchy, and key functions like judicial appointments and discipline are centralised.
The Clear Division of Legislative and Executive Powers
To contextualise the unique position of the judiciary, it is necessary to first briefly outline the separation of powers within the other branches. The legislative powers of Nigeria are divided by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), hereafter 'the Constitution'. Section 4 vests legislative powers in the National Assembly for the federation and the House of Assembly for each state. The Second Schedule to the Constitution contains an Exclusive Legislative List of matters upon which only the National Assembly can legislate, and a Concurrent Legislative List for matters where both federal and state legislatures can make laws (with federal law prevailing in case of conflict). All other matters not on these lists are considered 'residual' and fall within the exclusive legislative competence of the state Houses of Assembly (Aduba, 2011).
Likewise, Section 5 of the Constitution divides executive powers. The executive power of the federation is vested in the President, while the executive power of a state is vested in the Governor. Each head of executive operates independently within their defined constitutional sphere of authority, managing their own cabinet and civil service, and executing laws made by their respective legislatures. This clear demarcation is a fundamental feature of Nigerian federalism, ensuring a degree of autonomy for both levels of government.
The Integrated Structure of the Nigerian Judiciary
In contrast to the legislative and executive branches, the Nigerian judiciary does not follow a neat dual structure, where separate and parallel federal and state court systems co-exist. Instead, Section 6(5) of the Constitution establishes a single list of superior courts of record for both the federation and the states. These are: the Supreme Court of Nigeria; the Court of Appeal; the Federal High Court; the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja; a High Court of a State; the Sharia Court of Appeal of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja; a Sharia Court of Appeal of a State; the Customary Court of Appeal of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja; and a Customary Court of Appeal of a State.
The very structure of this judicial hierarchy points towards integration rather than division. At the apex is the Supreme Court of Nigeria, which is the final court of appeal for all other courts in the country, whether they are hearing matters of federal or state law (Section 233, the Constitution). Immediately below it is the Court of Appeal, which also has a national jurisdiction, hearing appeals from the Federal High Court, State High Courts, and other lower superior courts across the country (Section 240, the Constitution). As one scholar notes, these two highest courts function as "unifying institutions," ensuring a degree of uniformity in the interpretation of law throughout the federation (Malemi, 2012). This is fundamentally different from a system like that of the United States, where state supreme courts are the final arbiters of state law, and federal courts primarily deal with federal law.
Jurisdictional Overlaps and Centralisation
While there are courts designated as 'federal' and 'state', their jurisdictional boundaries are not always clear and do not create a truly separate system. The Federal High Court is given exclusive jurisdiction over specific matters, primarily those concerning the revenue of the Government of the Federation, as well as areas like admiralty, copyright, and federal taxation, as enumerated in Section 251 of the Constitution. The State High Courts are granted broad jurisdiction over most other civil and criminal matters within the state.
However, the line between these jurisdictions has historically been a source of significant litigation and confusion (Okonkwo, 2017). This has led to numerous cases being struck out for want of jurisdiction after years in the court system, creating inefficiency and undermining public confidence. While constitutional amendments have aimed to clarify these boundaries, the very existence of such protracted disputes highlights that the division is not as clear as it is in the legislative and executive spheres. The fact that appeals from both the Federal High Court and State High Courts proceed to the same Court of Appeal further reinforces the integrated nature of the system.
The Centralising Role of the National Judicial Council (NJC)
Perhaps the most compelling evidence for a unified judiciary is the role and power of the National Judicial Council (NJC). The NJC is a federal executive body established under Section 153 of the Constitution, with its composition and functions detailed in the Third Schedule. The NJC exercises a remarkable degree of central control over the judiciary nationwide. Its key functions include recommending to the President and Governors the appointment of judicial officers for almost all superior courts of record, from the Chief Justice of Nigeria down to judges of State High Courts, Sharia Courts of Appeal, and Customary Courts of Appeal.
Furthermore, the NJC has the power to recommend the removal of judicial officers and to exercise disciplinary control over them (Third Schedule, Part I, Paragraph 21). This means that a federal body is responsible for the appointment, discipline, and removal of state judges. This centralisation of personnel management is a significant departure from a truly federal judicial model, where states would be expected to have autonomy over the appointment and discipline of their own judges (Sagay, 2008). This structure ensures uniform standards and is intended to insulate judges from local political pressures, but it fundamentally demonstrates that the state judiciaries are not independent entities in the same way that state legislatures and executives are.
Conclusion
The proposition that the Nigerian judiciary does not share the same clear division of powers seen in the legislative and executive branches is correct. Nigeria’s federalism has produced a unique judicial arrangement that prioritises unity and hierarchy over a dual federal-state court structure. The system is characterised by a single appellate pyramid culminating in the Supreme Court, significant jurisdictional overlaps between federal and state courts, and, most importantly, the centralising influence of the National Judicial Council over the appointment and discipline of both federal and state judges. While the Constitution creates both federal and state courts, it welds them into a single, integrated system. Therefore, it is accurate to say that while Nigeria’s legislative and executive powers are clearly divided along federal lines, its judiciary is organised as a unitary whole operating within that federal framework.
References
Aduba, J.N. (2011) 'Revisiting the Basis of Federalism in Nigeria', Nnamdi Azikiwe University Journal of International Law and Jurisprudence, 2, pp. 69-80.
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).
Malemi, E. (2012) The Nigerian Legal System. 4th edn. Princeton Publishing Co.
Okonkwo, R. (2017) 'Jurisdictional Conflict between the Federal High Court and State High Courts in Nigeria: A Continuing Search for a Solution', Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization, 68, pp. 28-36.
Sagay, I.E. (2008) Nigerian Law of Contract. 2nd edn. Spectrum Books.
