LEGAL AND DIVINE JUSTICE (Law and Health Column)

By Barr. Uche C. P. Omeje

Christians worship God which they proud to be God of Justice. God's nature is justice. He is called a Just God. In His infinite wisdom, God created man in his image and wrote in the hearts of men his justice image. When it is said that man was created in the image of God, the allusion includes that man possesses the innate desire to do justice. No wonder human Judges that decide men's fate under secular laws go with the appellation 'Justice'. The courts where these Justices preside over human disputes are referred to as 'courts of Justice' or 'Temple of Justice'. 

In the light of this Justice attribute of God, one is tempted to question the kind of justice God is. That is to say, is the justice which God is the same as the justice which some judges render? Is that really the quality of God's justice? The answers to those questions are in the emphatic negative. Such response can be appreciated when legal justice is examined vis a vis Divine justice.

Justice generally in general term is the act of giving or rendering to one what is his due. Legal justice on the other hand concerns what the citizen owes or is entitled to in fairness to the community or society. While legal justice may be imperfect, divine justice is perfect. Legal justice is temporary but divine justice is eternal. Legal justice is rendered by man with all the attendant human limitations while divine justice is rendered by the omnipotent, omniscience and omnipresent Divinity. Accordingly, divine justice is faultless while legal justice may be faulty. It is the causes of these faults in legal justice that we have set out to examine and proffer solutions.

In the case of AJIDEV. KELANI (1985) 3 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 12) 248 at 269D, Justice Oputa of blessed memory referring to legal justice being delivered in courts said; “Justice is much more than a game of hide and seek. It is an attempt, our human imperfection notwithstanding, to discover the truth. And it will never decree anything in favour of a party so slippery or sly.  Every counsel, as officer of the court, owes the court and his client a duty of advancing the truth and proper advice.”  This dictum of Oputa J.S.C. (as he then was) is being followed religiously in several judicial authorities. See STATE V. OKPONNIPERE [2011] ALL F.W.L.R. (Pt.) 598 at 1005; OKAEKWU V. AGUFORI [2011] ALL F.W.L.R. (Pt.) 1603 at 1619.

The assertion being made by the learned justices is that legal justice can be and is capable of being imperfect. The acknowledgement of such possible situation where legal justice might be faulty gave rise to inbuilt legal mechanisms within the justice administration designed to ensure that imperfections or miscarriages found in legal justice is corrected. Such mechanisms includes but not limited to the provisions of appeal structures in our judicial set up. Persons dissatisfied with the justice rendered by a lower court can move to another higher court on the ladder to seek redress. Such errors are often corrected on appeal. 

Thus appeal ladder is from Magistrate Courts to the High Court and from High Court to the Court of appeal and from Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court which is the final Court of resort in Nigeria. In a bid to ensure that observed legal injustice is not perpetuated in the system, the Supreme Court is empowered to depart from its earlier judgment delivered per incuriam, i.e. in error.

Substantive laws made no pretence that legal justice may not be perfect. In appreciation that man can only do what is possible with the confines of human limitations, some statutes and judicial authorities set standards for legal justice. Section 135 (1) of Evidence Act 2011; “If the commission of a crime by a party to any proceeding is directly in issue in any proceeding civil or criminal, it must be proved beyond reasonable doubt.”In AHAMED V. STATE (2003) 3 A.C.L.R I45 at 177, the Court held that Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean proof to the degree of absolute certainty, but a proof to a high degree of probability. In other words, as courts strive to ensure that justice handed down in criminal trial are fair and just, such justice may not be absolutely certain. It might be based on probability, though such probability must be of high degree. 

In civil cases, justice may be based on preponderance of evidence and balance of probabilities. The Supreme Court in AGALA V. EGWERE (2010)ALL FWLR (Pt.532) 1609 held that Civil cases are determined on preponderance of evidence and balance of probabilities. The judicial authority accords with Section 134 of the Evidence Act 2011, which provides, “The burden of proof shall be discharged on the balance of probabilities in all civil proceedings”.

The essence of these legal provisions on administration of justice is an affirmation of the fact that man is not all knowing. Man is limited by space and time. Consequently, justice rendered by man from his limited knowledge may have some limitations called justice miscarriage.

The solutions to justice miscarriages in courts lie with the people. Judges rely entirely on evidence given to them by witnesses to reach fair and just decisions. Where people that know the true facts in a case refuse to testify before a court, such case must naturally fail and a judge will be incapacitated to serve a fair and just decision. Judges cannot and are not permitted to manufacture evidence. They are not allowed to give judgment based on their personal knowledge of a case, even if the true facts of the case are known to them extra judicial.

Criminal Proceedings commences with the laying of a complaint at the police station or before other security agencies. See THE STATE V. OKOLIE EKE (1979) A.N.S.L.R. 304. If perfect justice is to be attained, people who know the truth must go and testify at the police or at other security agencies unit handling the case. If the case goes to the court, such persons must follow up and give evidence in the court. The saying, “evil thrives when good people refuse to talk” is true at all times and in this in this respect. Like the radio giggle which encourages those who see something to say something, it is our view that legal justice will flourish if people that see something come out to say something. That is the only way to make legal justice to wear the garb of Divine justice which is personified in God.