Written by: IKECHUKWU BERNARD OKAFOR, LL.B, LL.M, B.L
Introduction
There is a saying that lawyers do the same work as medical doctors. While doctors attend to the ailing body of human beings, lawyers attend to their troubled souls – the troubled souls of litigants seeking to obtain justice or settle their disputes through the legal institution. It therefore follows that the court can be likened to a hospital and a judge is like a chief medical director of a hospital who determines the eventual outcome of a patient’s treatment by ensuring that other medical personnel properly perform their functions. By a further analogy it follows that a lawyer who knows only about litigation is like a medical doctor who knows only about surgery but is found in a general practice. Worse still, the court becomes like a specialist surgery hospital established to solve all medical problems using the same diagnostic procedure. One can imagine the absurdity of a situation where a well groomed gentle man in his medical lab coat moves in swiftly with his surgical instruments to save the life of a patient who is suffering from malaria. Over the years litigation has been about the only formal system of dispute resolution in our courts notwithstanding the increasing nature and diversity of disputes arising from different human activities since the industrial revolution. Thus, access to justice has usually been understood to mean access to courts through litigation.
Experience has shown that litigation is not a suitable means of resolution of several forms of dispute. Even in areas where it may be suitable several other factors, have always militated against its success especially in a developing country like Nigeria. The reality of this problem can be found in almost all jurisdictions of the world and governments of various countries continue to engage in judicial reforms so as to ensure that persons under their jurisdictions gain unhindered access to the courts to obtain justice. On the other hand parties to disputes continue to seek alternative ways of resolving their disputes without recourse to the courts. These alternative methods have, to different degrees been institutionalised, especially in the area of commercial disputes. These include mediation, conciliation, arbitration, etc. Notwithstanding the rising popularity of these alternative methods the importance of state-owned courts, as an integral part of modern government, cannot be over-emphasised. Some of the critical roles the courts play cannot be completely taken over by private persons. It therefore follows that much of the options left to the various stakeholders in the dispensation of justice is to fashion out ways of reforming the court system so as to make it efficient, effective, and accessible to all. The multi-door courthouse is one these reform programmes which governments in different jurisdictions have adapted to achieve the objectives of modern judiciary. The multi-door courthouse simply entails that rather than all litigants accessing the court through the door of litigation only, the court should provide them with other alternative doors such as mediation, conciliation and arbitration conducted under the supervision of the court. In doing this, the parties are availed the advantages of these alternative methods of dispute resolution over litigation while at the same time they enjoy the indispensable values of the court system. Achieving this is not a mean task. It involves substantial reform processes including a change of attitude by the various stakeholders.
The purpose of this article is to articulate the various issues involved in having a viable judicial system in Nigeria through the multi-door courthouse system. This process which started in United States has already been established in Lagos State and some other states in Nigeria, but it has hardly gained the well deserved appeal of the majority of the Nigerian courts. Moreover, there is yet a paucity of indigenous academic materials in this area, making it difficult for the public to avail themselves of the rich literature usually contributed from the legal academia in the development of our legal system. This is one of the reasons why this author has taken this initiative in order to elicit further reactions from the academic community.
It must be stated from the outset that while the concept of multi-door courthouse is good it does not automatically guaranty a solution to the myriad of problems confronting our judicial system today. It therefore follows that a careful study of the various issues raised here, among others will be required in order to fully establish a viable multi-door courthouse system in Nigeria. We start our analysis of these issues by first examining the importance of access to justice in the modern society. We follow this with a brief analysis of the nature of litigation and the various problems associated with it. We then introduce the concept of multi-door courthouse as part of the responses to these problems. We further examine the various roles each stakeholder in the administration of justice in Nigeria will have to play for this new innovation to be worth the while. The advantages and challenges associated with this court system will lead us to suggestions for further reforms.