•SAN, human rights lawyers insist justice must not become preserve of the rich
THE rising cost of litigation in the country, driven by increasing legal fees, filing charges and other expenses associated with court proceedings, has continued to generate concern over access to justice, particularly in election-related disputes involving politicians and other stakeholders.
For many litigants, the financial burden of pursuing a case through the courts has become a major consideration, with election petitions and other political disputes often requiring substantial financial and intellectual resources.
Legal practitioners, however, have offered differing perspectives on the issue, with some arguing that although litigation comes at a cost, mechanisms exist within the Nigerian legal system to ensure that access to justice is not restricted to the wealthy.
Speaking with Nigerian Tribune on the development, a legal practitioner with Falana & Falana’s Chambers, Mr. Samuel Ogala, attributed the rising cost of litigation to the broader economic realities confronting the country.
According to him, the increasing cost of living has inevitably affected the cost of accessing justice, as lawyers, courts and other professionals involved in the administration of justice operate within the same economic environment.
“The cost of justice in Nigeria is a reflection of the economic situation in Nigeria. The rising cost of living has its impact also on the cost of justice in Nigeria,” Ogala said, but pointed out that lawyers’ fees are not entirely left to individual discretion, noting that there are regulatory provisions governing the remuneration of legal practitioners.
Ogala said the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) regulates the fees lawyers can charge based on factors including the lawyer’s year of call, the nature of the brief and the location where the legal service is being provided.
He specifically referred to the Legal Practitioners Remuneration Order 2023, which, according to him, was designed to regulate legal fees and moderate the charges that lawyers impose on their clients.
The lawyer argued that the existence of such regulations provides an avenue for litigants from different economic backgrounds to seek legal redress without necessarily being excluded because of their financial circumstances.
“This gives room for access to justice for the poor and the rich depending on the nature of the case,” he said, stressing further that access to justice should not be regarded as the exclusive preserve of wealthy individuals or politicians with deep financial resources.
He further noted that the legal profession also provides opportunities for people who cannot afford legal representation to obtain assistance through pro bono legal services.
According to him, the provision of pro bono services is an important component of the profession and is also relevant to the requirements associated with applications for the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN).
However, another lawyer, Mr. Nnaemeka Ejiofor, offered a different perspective on the financial implications of litigation, stressing that the cost of legal proceedings goes beyond the payment of professional fees.
Ejiofor said litigation could be expensive in terms of time, money and intellectual resources, particularly where complex matters are involved.
According to him, the quality and experience of the lawyer handling a case can also have a significant influence on the cost of legal representation.
“Litigation is expensive with respect to time, money and intellectual resources. The best lawyers cost handsomely,” Ejiofor said and explained that political and election-related matters could be particularly sensitive because the cost of representation may be influenced by several factors.
Among these, he identified the political position involved in the dispute, the financial standing of the client and the calibre or class of lawyer engaged to handle the matter.
“In political matters, consideration is given to the position in contention, the financial standing of the client and the class of the lawyer,” he said and also noted that there was no single, fixed price for legal services in political or election-related litigation, as fees could vary significantly from one law firm to another.
“Otherwise, there is no specific price for services. It varies from chamber to chamber,” he added.
A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Dr Abiodun Layonu, who acknowledged that the cost of litigation has increased significantly alongside the general rise in the cost of living and doing business in the country, explained that the increasing cost of filing court processes, lawyers’ fees and other litigation-related expenses has made access to justice more difficult for financially disadvantaged Nigerians.
According to the SAN, “Like everything else in the world today and in Nigeria and with our economy, everything is expensive now. It has gone up relatively. And that includes litigation, costs of filing, lawyers’ fees, etc.
Dr Layonu, however, pointed out that the rules of various courts provide some protection for indigent litigants through a legal mechanism that allows people who cannot afford litigation expenses to seek justice without paying the usual fees.
Dr Layonu revealed that the High Court rules generally contain provisions on how financially disadvantaged litigants can apply to institute proceedings in forma pauperis.
The SAN explained that whether an individual qualifies depends on the circumstances of each case and whether the applicant satisfies the conditions stipulated by the relevant court rules.
Dr Layonu recalled that Nigeria previously had a more functional legal aid system designed to assist people who could not afford legal representation, particularly in criminal cases and some civil matters.
However, the SAN showed concern that some of these mechanisms now exist largely in theory rather than in practical operation.
He said: “In the old days when Nigeria was a bit better than or more comfortable than now, we also had legal aid that would cater, not for all cases, but for some cases, especially in terms of criminal defence and some civil matters.
“The objective was to ensure that poverty did not prevent citizens from ventilating their rights before the courts.
“But we all know that some of these things now only exist in theory or in the statutes. They are practically not really functioning.”
He equally identified increasing court filing fees and the growing adoption of electronic filing as additional challenges for litigants.
On his part, another senior legal luminary and rights activist, Chief Malachy Ugwummadu, contended that the cost of justice should not be assessed solely from the perspective of lawyers’ fees and court filing charges.
He said the cost of justice also includes the time required to conclude cases, bureaucratic obstacles and the difficulties citizens face in enforcing judgments after they have been delivered.
In his words: “That’s a very relative question, because you cannot assess and compare if you have other jurisdictions to juxtapose with ours. Nevertheless, you can safely say that justice is not a cheap commodity in Nigeria today.”
While noting that the financial cost of litigation represents only one aspect of the broad problem confronting access to justice, Ugwummadu pointed out that although fundamental rights enforcement proceedings may be relatively cheaper to institute than some other forms of litigation, prolonged delays in the justice system can impose financial and emotional burdens on litigants.
The human rights advocate revealed that citizens who begin legal proceedings enthusiastically can become weary after spending several years pursuing their cases.
In his view, “In criminal cases, for instance, the witnesses, some have passed on or relocated, or become very lukewarm in testifying any longer. In some other cases, the body of evidence you have may get lost.”
The senior lawyer equally pointed to situations where judges are transferred or die, potentially resulting in proceedings commencing de novo, thereby compounding delays in cases that have already lasted several years.
Ugwummadu equally identified enforcement of court judgments as one of the most difficult aspects of Nigeria’s justice system.
But another human rights lawyer, Ige Asemudara, came up with a different perspective on the issue, particularly regarding election petitions.
For Asemudara, most parties involved in election litigation cannot strictly be classified as ordinary citizens because they are generally politicians or political actors with the financial capacity to engage lawyers.
The lawyer posited that election petitions are often complex and demanding, which, according to him, require lawyers to devote time and resources to them.
In his words: “For election matters, my candid opinion is that those politicians are not ordinary citizens. Most of them can afford what they have been charged.”
Asemudara revealed that election cases can require legal luminaries to work extensively, sometimes on a day-to-day basis, making it reasonable for legal practitioners to charge fees that reflect the time, energy, and resources invested.
The human rights advocate explained that the same principle applies to commercial litigation, where he said legal fees may depend on the complexity of the dispute, the parties involved, and the amount of work required from the legal team.