BYLINE: Hon. Ibrahim Abubakar (Jambali), Special Adviser to Kebbi State Governor on Public Enlightenment
Birnin Kebbi, Kebbi State, Nigeria - August 6, 2025 (Series News Online)
The independence of the judiciary is a cornerstone of democracy, and in times of rising political tension, it is often the first institution to come under scrutiny. Recently, the Centre for Reform and Public Advocacy accused the Kebbi State Government of "weaponizing" the Magistrate and Area Courts against political dissenters.
According to the group, the courts in Kebbi State have allegedly become an assembly line for punishing government critics through "frivolous charges" and "harsh sentences." However, the allegations against Kebbi's justice system are curiously thin, with no court transcripts, case files, or affidavits produced to support the claims.
The Centre's accusations were made at a press conference in Abuja, where they demanded the release of all detainees, disciplinary action against police officers, and international monitoring of the state's human rights landscape. However, the lack of concrete evidence raises questions about the true objective of the Centre's activism.
Take, for instance, the case of Ibrahim Adamu Augie, said to have been jailed for "publishing a video on health issues." The Centre's account omits critical context, such as whether there was incitement or other laws breached. The courts in Kebbi, like all courts in Nigeria, operate within the bounds of the Constitution and are not immune to criticism.
Offences like incitement, defamation, and public nuisance are longstanding legal categories found in most legal systems. To conflate their invocation with persecution is to erase the line between unlawful detention and legitimate prosecution.
The real danger of the Centre's posture is that it risks eroding trust in the very institutions that stand between democracy and disorder. If the judiciary is portrayed as a puppet without concrete proof, and every arrest becomes persecution, the rule of law itself becomes negotiable.
Kebbi's judicial officers are not political novices, and accusing them of lending "legitimacy to abuses" without a shred of admissible evidence is not advocacy, it's defamation. The integrity of the courts must be defended not only from political interference but also from politicized activism masquerading as truth.
Tags
Rejoinder