British Oil Interests and the Nigeria/Biafra Conflict: The Historical Role of Shell-BP in British Policy Decisions

Abstract

Nigeria is making steady progress towards a workable democracy, but one sordid point remains: the fact that the doctrine of separation of powers has had limited relevance in our polity. We are confronted with the reality of how shackled and stymied the work of the judiciary has become in recent times. The question being asked is whether our judiciary is independent, free, and impartial, or if it is tied to the apron strings of the executive, constantly harried and dragged by the nose by the executive arm of government in the way our courts get intimidated, harassed, and manacled in the discharge of their duties. They have been repeatedly arrested, rounded up, and exposed to hurdles and bullying by the security agencies, like letting loose a pack of Rottweilers onto a herd of frayed and scared lambs. We have examined this both as officers of the temple of justice and as academicians, from the point of view of the requirements of the constitution, the rule of law, instances of executive violations of judicial independence, and the consequences of the erosion and importance of public confidence in judicial independence. We conclude by recommending that the 1999 Constitution be amended to guarantee financial autonomy, security of tenure, and administrative independence of the judiciary. We have also argued that there should be safeguards for judicial independence, such as setting up an independent judicial advisory committee that should be charged with the duty of selecting judges, and that the immunity clause in the 1999 Constitution be amended so that any case of inappropriate interference, intervention, inducement, or influence of judicial duties by the executive would attract a heavy sanction.