In some courts in Abuja, they tell you that if you have a case against the FCT minister, it’s a no-go area. You hear things like so-so judge belongs to so-so politician. And you won’t blame them. You can’t gift 40 judges mansions and expect different.”

Why Senior Advocate of Nigeria Magaji Mato has warned that public confidence in the Federal Capital Territory judiciary is being undermined by perceptions of political influence, particularly in cases involving the FCT Minister.

“In some courts in Abuja, they tell you that if you have a case against the FCT minister, it’s a no-go area,” Mato told reporters. “You hear things like ‘so-so judge belongs to so-so politician.’ And you won’t blame them. You can’t gift 40 judges mansions and expect different.”

### *The Comment and Its Context*

Mato’s remarks come amid a federal government project to provide residential accommodation for 40 judges in Abuja. Officials have described the initiative as a welfare intervention aimed at improving the living conditions of judicial officers.

Mato, however, said the scale and source of the benefit raise questions about judicial independence. “The issue is not whether judges should be well-housed,” he said. “The issue is perception. When the executive makes large gifts to the judiciary, litigants begin to doubt neutrality.”

### *Allegations of a ‘No-Go Area’*

The SAN said the idea that certain cases cannot succeed is now common among lawyers and litigants in Abuja.

“You hear things like ‘so-so judge belongs to so-so politician,’” he stated. “Whether true or not, that belief alone is enough to keep people away from court.”

Lawyers in the FCT have repeatedly raised concerns about delays in politically sensitive matters, case assignments, and forum-shopping. The judiciary has maintained that all cases are decided on merit and in accordance with the law.

### *The Independence Question*

Section 17(2)(e) of the 1999 Constitution and the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers require the judiciary to remain free from external influence. Legal scholars say judicial welfare is important, given challenges of housing, security, and remuneration.

The concern, they argue, is about process. Benefits that flow directly from the executive, rather than through the National Judicial Council or a transparent institutional framework, can create a reasonable apprehension of bias.

“You can’t gift 40 judges mansions and expect different,” Mato reiterated. “Independence must be protected in structure, not just in principle….See More