Supreme Court Now Has Full Constitutional Complement of Justice- CJN
The Chief Justice of Nigeria ,CJN, Justice Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun has said Supreme Court of Nigeria now stands at its full constitutional complement with the elevation of Justice Joseph Olubunmi Kayode Oyewole to its bench.
Justice Kekere -Ekun stated this on Wednesday while swearing in justice Oyewole who was recently elevated to the bench of the Supreme Court of Nigeria.
“This occasion carries an added institutional importance” and “this is no small milestone”, she said.
“A full Court enhances our capacity to sit in robust panels, to manage our docket more efficiently, and to ensure that the business of the Nation’s apex Court proceeds with renewed vigour and dispatch.
“It enriches intellectual diversity, and reinforces the stability of our jurisprudence.
“For a Court whose pronouncements shape the legal destiny of the Nation, numerical completeness is structurally significant to the effective discharge of our constitutional mandate.”
She said that appointment to the Supreme Court “is not simply the culmination of professional distinction; it is the acceptance of a sacred national responsibility. The Supreme Court stands at the apex of our judicial architecture.”
Essentially as, “Its pronouncements settle controversies, shape the development of our jurisprudence, and define the contours of constitutional governance.”
The CJN said that Supreme Court of Nigeria judgments do not speak only to the parties before it; they speak to
generations yet unborn.
“The authority of this Court rests not on force, but on the moral weight of its reasoning, the discipline of its processes, and the integrity of men and women privileged to serve on its Bench.”
The CJN reminded Justice Oyewole that his elevation is a testament to years of disciplined scholarship, fidelity to the law, and distinguished service on the Bench.
“Your judicial record reflects intellectual depth, independence of thought, clarity of expression, and a clear appreciation of the relationship between enduring legal principle and evolving social realities.”
According to her, “these are qualities indispensable to the work of this Court, where issues are often
complex, and where the margin for error is narrow but the consequences of every decision far-reaching.”
Stating that at this level, “the judicial function transcends the resolution of disputes. It demands stewardship, careful guardianship of precedent, principled development of the law, and unwavering allegiance to constitutional supremacy.”
She advise that Justice of this Court must possess the courage to affirm settled doctrine where stability demands it, and the wisdom to refine.
The CJN also spoke briefly about collegiality and independence, which are two pillars upon which the strength of this Court rests.
“The Supreme Court is a collegiate court. Its authority is strengthened when its members deliberate with mutual respect, candour, and intellectual generosity.”
Collegiality does not require uniformity of thought; rather, it demands a disciplined commitment to reasoned
engagement, she said adding that “It requires that each Justice approach conference with an open mind, listen with patience, and contribute with clarity and humility.”
“The collective wisdom of the Court emerges from robust yet respectful exchange,” the CJN added.
“Nevertheless, collegiality must never dilute independence of mind. Each Justice bears personal responsibility for every judgment to which his or her name is affixed.
She called upon their Lordships to decide according to law and conscience, free from fear, favour, affection, or ill-will.
She added that where their “Lordship’s considered conviction differs from that of your brother Justices, Your Lordship must have the courage to dissent with courtesy and precision.”
A principled dissent, expressed with intellectual honesty, is not a fracture of unity; it is often the seed of future doctrinal growth.
She said the oaths taken by the new justice represent a covenant, binding in conscience and in law. It demands moral courage when decisions are unpopular, restraint when passions run high, and steadfastness when pressures, subtle or overt, seek to intrude upon judicial independence.
At this level of adjudication, scrutiny is intense and commentary often instantaneous . She urged that Lordship compass must remain fixed upon the Constitution and the law.
