Have you ever wondered why recording court proceedings in Nigeria feels like stepping on a live wire?
This week, we spotlight a case that continues to stir conversations — Inibehe Effiong vs CJ, Akwa Ibom State.
Beyond the headlines, it raises a bigger question: Why are judges so uncomfortable with transparency in the courtroom?
The piece doesn’t just raise eyebrows; it raises valid legal concerns and challenges long-standing courtroom norms.
If justice is truly meant for the public, why the resistance to public scrutiny?
This week’s insight
Topic: Inibehe Effiong Vs Cj, Akwa Ibom State; Why Are Judges Against Recording Of Court Proceedings?
The case of Inibehe Effiong brought a lot of things to the fore, a lot of things wrong with our justice system.
Today, I will point out one: Why do judges always take offence when court proceedings are being recorded?
I challenge any lawyer, judge, or scholar to point me to a provision of the law or rule that prohibits litigants, lawyers, journalists, or members of the public from videoing or recording court proceedings in Nigeria.
(Apart from juvenile proceedings and maybe those consented to by parties).
The Constitution provides that all court proceedings must be in public. Why do judges try to keep secret what is meant for the public?
Inibehe’s purported contempt case might tell us why. The Chief Judge of Akwa Ibom State has released the records of proceedings in the case where she jailed the lawyer for contempt of court.
Have you seen the irony this situation presents: this contempt case is between Inibehe and the CJ, and the only record the public and the Court of Appeal can rely on to determine what really transpired is the record produced by the CJ!
Yes, I know the record of proceedings can be legally challenged and impugned, but all this drama wouldn’t be necessary if the proceedings were recorded by journalists and members of the public. How can we know the truth of what transpired in court by depending solely on the record of the judge, who is now a party in the whole saga?
This continuous barring of members of the public from recording court proceedings has absolutely no positive side.
Those who argue that allowing anyone who wants to record court proceedings to do so will lead to transparency and stem corruption and abuse of office on the bench have a salient point.
I have read the records of proceedings and the judge wants me to believe that Inibehe or any lawyer for that matter, will bang the table, shout and point at a judge and say ”I will not continue…”? Hmmm.
Maybe it’s true. Maybe, Ini smoked something that day; but now that the CJ is both the offended and the judge, forgive me if I refused to take her word alone, on that record of proceedings, as final.
Again, you see, this is where it would have been great to allow that Premium Times journalist she sent out to record the proceedings. But she sent him out and now wants us to believe her story as contained in the records of proceedings.
As I said earlier, I know certainly that the records of proceedings will be challenged, but even as it is, the records of proceedings show manifest irregularities and patent vacancies.
The proper procedure for contempt in facie curia was not carried out. From where I stand the conviction for contempt is void. In closing, we have to go back to the initial question: why are judges so uncomfortable with court proceedings being recorded? What’s going on?
Nicked from WhatsApp group
