A Psychologist’s Call for Substance Screening in the Nigerian Judiciary Amidst Confusing Judgments

Preserving Judicial Clarity Beyond Paper Error, Clearing Minds: A Psychologist’s Advocacy for Substance Screening in the Nigerian Judiciary Amidst Confusing Judgments, The Kano Case

In the intricate dance of legal proceedings, recent revelations surrounding a so-calledclerical error in a Certified True Copy (CTC) of a judgment have exposed the underbelly of administrative and legal vulnerabilities within the judicial system. This incident is not merely a matter of paperwork; it unveils concerns that stretch beyond procedural mishaps, delving into the potential impact on the mental acuity and ethical fortitude of those entrusted with the noble responsibility of dispensing justice.

The Kano State Governorship Election saga, characterized by clerical errors and confusing verdicts, serves as a stark reminder of the need for a legal system that is not only robust in its paperwork but fortified in the mental and ethical integrity of its personnel. In response to these challenges, the call for comprehensive substance testing emerges as a proactive step toward ensuring clarity, consistency, and an unwavering commitment to justice.

The labyrinthine nature of legal proceedings demands not only precision in paperwork but an unwavering commitment to mental acuity and ethical resilience. Judges, magistrates, registrars, clerks, and administrators bear the weighty responsibility of upholding the rule of law, and any hint of confusion or doubt in their decisions reverberates through the entire legal system, chipping away at public trust and confidence.

In the recent spotlight, the registry candidly admitted to a clerical error present in the judgment’s Certified True Copy (CTC). This admission, coupled with the pledge to rectify the error upon the submission of a formal application, propels the discourse into the realm of the timeliness of such corrections. The revelation prompts a crucial consideration of the need for comprehensive substance testing within the judiciary.

It’s essential to clarify that advocating for drug and substance testing is not an accusation of individuals abusing drugs or being under the influence. Rather, it underscores the significance of precautions, particularly in sensitive environments like the judiciary. The call for comprehensive substance testing is grounded in the necessity for individuals working in these critical roles to undergo screening. This is not only a matter of due diligence but also a proactive step to ensure that personnel in the judiciary operate in a state of mental clarity, free from any factors that could potentially compromise their judgment, decision-making, and overall professional conduct. The aim is to uphold the highest standards of integrity and maintain public confidence in the judiciary, recognizing the pivotal role it plays in administering justice.

In the aftermath of confusing judgments, the call for substance testing transcends the confines of legality. It becomes a call for a holistic approach to addressing potential influences, both internal and external, on the minds responsible for upholding justice. This call extends beyond the conventional notion of substance abuse, encompassing stress, tobacco use, and other factors that can sway the delicate balance of mental and ethical resilience.

The emphasis on timeliness in corrective actions echoes loudly in this discourse. The acknowledgment of the clerical error and the commitment to rectify it, while reassuring, raises the question: Could this correction have been done on time to avert the public spectacle of conflicting judgments? The proactive nature of substance testing aligns with this concern, offering a preventive layer that addresses potential cognitive impacts before they become public spectacles.

Drawing inspiration from developed societies where substance screening is institutionalized, Nigeria stands at the threshold of an opportunity to align itself with global best practices. This isn’t just about paperwork rectification; it is about fortifying the judiciary against potential pitfalls and fostering a culture of excellence that assures citizens of an unwavering commitment to the highest standards of integrity.

The confusion surrounding the Kano State governorship election judgment serves as a catalyst for a broader conversation about the mental and ethical fortitude of those steering the ship of justice. It underscores the imperative for a clear mind, unwavering focus, and sound judgment in the intricate realm of the judiciary. Substance screening for court personnel, including clerks, magistrates, registrars, court officers, judges, and justices, emerges not as a bureaucratic formality but as a strategic investment in preserving the integrity and efficacy of the judicial system.

In the canvas of Nigeria’s developing society, the call for comprehensive substance screening within the judiciary echoes as a clarion call for progress. It goes beyond the immediate challenges presented by clerical errors, reaching into the very essence of the legal profession’s commitment to justice. As the nation strides forward in its developmental journey, fortifying the pillars of justice becomes not just an aspiration but a prerequisite for a society anchored in fairness, transparency, and the unwavering rule of law.

This imperative extends beyond those actively engaged in the judiciary, encompassing aspiring legal professionals, student trainees, applicants, and interns. These individuals represent the future pillars of the legal system, and their engagement with substance screening sets the tone for a judiciary rooted in fairness, transparency, and unwavering commitment to justice.

For those entering the legal profession, substance screening becomes a foundational aspect of ethical and professional development. It underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the highest standards from the early stages of one’s legal career. Aspiring legal professionals should view substance screening not as an intrusion but as a commitment to fostering a culture of excellence and accountability within the legal system.

Interns and trainees, as they embark on their legal journey, should recognize substance screening as an integral part of their professional responsibilities. Embracing this practice is not just about compliance but about actively contributing to the creation of a legal environment where mental clarity, ethical fortitude, and adherence to the rule of law are paramount.

Furthermore, applicants seeking positions within the judiciary should understand that substance screening is not a mere formality but a reflection of the judiciary’s commitment to maintaining a workforce that operates with integrity and sound judgment. It becomes a shared responsibility between the judiciary and its personnel to ensure a workplace that is free from the influences that could compromise the quality of legal decision-making.

In essence, the imperative of substance screening in the wake of confusing judgments is a collective call to action. It beckons not only to those currently within the judiciary but to those entering its ranks – the future stewards of justice. By embracing substance screening comprehensively and consistently, the Nigerian judiciary can fortify its foundations, instill public confidence, and contribute to the development of a legal system that stands as a beacon of fairness, transparency, and unwavering commitment to justice.

Professor John Egbeazien Oshodi, who was born in Uromi, Edo State, Nigeria, to a father who served in the Nigeria police for 37 years, is an American-based police and prison scientist and forensic, clinical, and legal psychologist. A government consultant on matters of forensic-clinical psychological services in the USA; and a former interim associate dean and assistant professor at Broward College, Florida. The Founder of the Dr. John Egbeazien Oshodi Foundation, Center for Psychological Health and Behavioral Change in African Settings. In 2011, he introduced state-of-the-art forensic psychology into Nigeria through N.U.C. and Nasarawa State University, where he served in the Department of Psychology as an Associate Professor. He has taught at various universities and colleges including Florida memorial University, Florida International University, Broward college, Lynn University, and a contributing faculty member at the Weldios university in Benin Republic, Nexus International University, Uganda, Nova Southeastern University and Walden University in USA. He is a Human Rights Psychologist with a focus on African related environments. john.oshodi@mail.waldenu.edu