Speaking on Monday, October 12, at a special Supreme Court session marking the commencement of the 2026/2027 legal year, Kekere-Ekun called for greater professional responsibility in handling election-related cases. “There is also a need for greater professional responsibility by lawyers in the institution of proceedings arising from political and electoral disputes,” she said.
She described forum shopping as “the deliberate choice of commencing an action in a court or division perceived to be more favourable to a particular party” or “the institution of multiple proceedings seeking substantially similar reliefs”. The practice, she said, “can result in conflicting orders, undermine orderly judicial process and expose the judiciary to avoidable embarrassment”.
“It can also create the unfortunate impression that parties are seeking not justice according to law but a particular outcome from a particular court,” she added. Kekere-Ekun urged lawyers to exercise professional judgement before filing proceedings, especially when related cases were already pending elsewhere.
“The duty of counsel to the court requires full candour as to the existence of related proceedings and respect for the jurisdiction and processes of other courts,” she said. She stressed that lawyers’ responsibilities extended beyond obtaining an immediate advantage for clients to protecting “the integrity and orderly functioning of the judicial process”.
The CJN also called for restraint and impartiality within the judiciary as political litigation increases ahead of the elections. “They must therefore exercise restraint, avoid political association or conduct capable of creating an appearance of partiality and remain firmly within the boundaries imposed by their oath and the Constitution,” she said.
“The judiciary must approach such matters with the same calmness, detachment and fidelity to the law that it brings to every other dispute.” She warned that the urgency or public prominence of political cases “should not come at the expense of other legitimate claims awaiting determination”.
Kekere-Ekun also expressed concern over delays in releasing funds approved for the judiciary, saying they disrupted projects and affected the administration of justice. “There are instances in which provision has been made in the approved budget and the necessary approvals obtained, but the funds are not thereafter released or disbursed when they are required,” she said.
“Delayed release has practical consequences: projects are deferred, procurement cycles are disrupted and the real value of appropriated funds is eroded by inflation and rising costs. There must therefore be a reliable and predictable mechanism for the timely release and disbursement of funds duly appropriated for the judiciary.” She said the problem was more pronounced at the state level and emphasised that judicial independence required adequate institutional support.
“Judicial independence must therefore be more than a constitutional expression,” she said. “It must be supported by the institutional conditions necessary for the Judiciary to discharge its constitutional responsibilities effectively, independently and with integrity.” Reviewing the Supreme Court’s performance, Kekere-Ekun said it handled 2,456 matters during the 2025/2026 legal year, compared with 2,280 in the preceding year. The court delivered 411 judgements, against 369 judgements and rulings in the previous legal year.
“These figures provide a useful measure of institutional activity, but they cannot tell the full story,” she said, acknowledging the need for further progress in managing pending cases. She said the court had begun bringing older cases forward for hearing, disposing of dormant matters and removing concluded cases from its active docket.
The e-diary office scheduled 1,385 matters for regular sittings between March 23 and December 17, 2026, comprising 1,021 motions and 364 appeals. Of those scheduled matters, 733 were older cases brought forward for hearing. Another 178 dormant matters were disposed of in chambers, while 125 concluded matters were identified and removed from the active pool.
“These measures reflect a more deliberate approach to managing our docket: identifying what is truly pending, bringing older matters forward, dealing appropriately with moribund matters and removing concluded matters from the active list,” she said. Kekere-Ekun said the court would continue addressing its backlog through disciplined case management, effective use of judicial resources and regular reviews of its processes.