Forum Shopping in the Nigerian Legal System: A Persistent Abuse of Court Process

Tsaku Esther 

University of Jos 

 

Abstract

Forum shopping has emerged as a troubling trend within the Nigerian legal system, particularly in political and pre-election litigation. It involves the deliberate filing of similar or identical suits in multiple courts or jurisdictions to secure a favorable or strategic outcome. Although not explicitly defined in statute, Nigerian courts have consistently characterized forum shopping as a severe abuse of court process that undermines judicial integrity, promotes conflicting judgments, and erodes public confidence in the justice system. Through an examination of leading judicial authorities—including Saraki v. Kotoye, PDP v. INEC, APC v. Karfi, and Oyetola v. INEC—this paper highlights the courts’ increasing intolerance for this practice and the measures adopted to curb it. The ethical implications for legal practitioners, alongside the disciplinary role of the National Judicial Council (NJC), are also explored. Ultimately, the paper argues that forum shopping poses a systemic threat to the administration of justice in Nigeria and calls for stronger institutional vigilance, stricter sanctions, and a renewed commitment to ethical advocacy to preserve the integrity of the judicial process.

INTRODUCTION 

Forum shopping has evolved into a persistent challenge within Nigeria’s adjudicatory framework, particularly in the wake of heightened political and pre-election litigation. As litigants increasingly seek judicial forums most likely to grant favorable outcomes , the practice raises significant concerns regarding procedural propriety, judicial consistency, and the integrity of adjudication. Although Nigerian statutory instruments do not expressly conceptualize forum shopping, its recognition within judicial discourse situates it firmly under the legal doctrine of abuse of court process. Through deliberate filing of parallel suits in courts of coordinate jurisdiction—or in judicial divisions perceived to be sympathetic—litigants exploit procedural loopholes to obtain strategic advantages. This introduction situates the phenomenon within Nigeria’s legal culture, outlining its implications for judicial hierarchy, ethical advocacy, and the broader administration of justice.

 

 

The Concept and Nature of Forum Shopping

Although the term “forum shopping” is not explicitly defined in Nigerian legislation, its essence has long been recognized by the courts under the broader doctrine of abuse of court process. The Supreme Court, in Saraki v. Kotoye (1992) 9 NWLR (Pt. 264) 156, described abuse of court process as the improper use of the judicial process for purposes other than those sanctioned by law, especially where multiple actions are filed on the same subject matter between the same parties.

In practical terms, forum shopping often manifests in two ways. First, when a litigant files the same case in different courts of coordinate jurisdiction — such as the Federal High Court and State High Court — in the hope of obtaining a favorable interlocutory order. Second, when lawyers deliberately file matters in far-flung judicial divisions perceived to have judges more amenable to their client’s cause. Both forms amount to legal misconduct and threaten the coherence of judicial decisions.

 

Judicial Condemnation of Forum Shopping

 

Nigerian appellate courts have consistently frowned upon forum shopping, labeling it a malignant abuse that undermines the administration of justice.

 

In Okafor v. A.G. Anambra State (1991) 6 NWLR (Pt. 200) 659, the Supreme Court warned that “where a litigant pursues the same remedy in different courts, he abuses the process of the court.”

 

Recent decisions reinforce this judicial position:

 

In PDP v. INEC & Ors (2023) LPELR-60727(SC), the apex court condemned the practice of filing pre-election suits in multiple divisions, stating that “forum shopping has become a malignant abuse of judicial process which courts must stamp out.”

 

Similarly, in APC v. Karfi (2023) LPELR-59917(CA), the Court of Appeal denounced forum shopping as “judicial manipulation designed to embarrass the court.”

 

The Supreme Court in Oyetola v. INEC & Ors (2023) LPELR-60586(SC) warned that once a competent court is seized of a matter, parties must not engage in “judicial tourism” by seeking parallel judgments elsewhere.

 

 

Even beyond political litigation, the Federal High Court in Emefiele v. Federal Government of Nigeria (Unreported, FHC/ABJ/CS/2024) criticized the multiplicity of suits filed to frustrate prosecution, noting that such behavior “undermines judicial integrity and public

Consequences and Ethical Dimensions:

 

Forum shopping carries serious consequences. The immediate legal consequence is that such a suit is liable to be struck out or dismissed as an abuse of court process. Courts may also impose punitive costs against litigants or counsel who engage in it. Beyond this, it may attract disciplinary measures from the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) under the Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC 2023), which mandate lawyers to conduct litigation with honesty and fairness.

 

On the institutional level, the National Judicial Council (NJC) has taken a firm stance against forum shopping, particularly in pre-election disputes. In 2022, the NJC sanctioned several judges who entertained politically motivated suits outside their territorial jurisdiction. The Chief Justice of Nigeria has since reiterated that courts must refrain from granting ex parte orders in matters already pending elsewhere

Implications for the Justice System

 

Forum shopping erodes the public’s trust in the judiciary, fosters conflicting judgments, and encourages perception of bias and corruption. It also delays justice, wastes judicial resources, and places undue pressure on the court system. More importantly, it undermines the doctrine of judicial hierarchy and comity, which requires courts of coordinate jurisdiction to act with mutual respect and restraint.

 

To curb this menace, Nigerian courts must continue to apply strict sanctions against erring parties and legal practitioners. Judicial officers must exercise greater vigilance in verifying whether similar suits are pending elsewhere before entertaining new filings. Likewise, the Nigerian Bar Association must intensify ethical education and discipline among its members.

Conclusion

Forum shopping is not merely a procedural irregularity; it is a fundamental threat to the credibility and stability of the Nigerian legal system. As the courts and the NJC continue to clamp down on this abuse, the legal community must embrace a culture of ethical advocacy anchored on integrity and respect for judicial process. The survival of Nigeria’s rule of law depends not just on the strength of its courts, but on the honesty of those who appear before them.

BIBLIOGRAPHY  

Cases

APC v Karfi (2023) LPELR-59917 (CA).

Emefiele v Federal Government of Nigeria (Unreported, FHC/ABJ/CS/2024).

Okafor v A.G. Anambra State (1991) 6 NWLR (Pt 200) 659.

Oyetola v INEC & Ors (2023) LPELR-60586 (SC).

PDP v INEC & Ors (2023) LPELR-60727 (SC).

Saraki v Kotoye (1992) 9 NWLR (Pt 264) 156.

 

Legislation / Regulations

Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners (RPC) 2023.

 

Other Sources

National Judicial Council, ‘Revised Policy on Political and Ex Parte Orders’ (2022).

1. Saraki v Kotoye (1992) 9 NWLR (Pt 264) 156.

 

 

2. Okafor v A.G. Anambra State (1991) 6 NWLR (Pt 200) 659.

 

 

3. PDP v INEC & Ors (2023) LPELR-60727 (SC).

 

 

4. APC v Karfi (2023) LPELR-59917 (CA).

 

 

5. Oyetola v INEC & Ors (2023) LPELR-60586 (SC).

 

 

6. Emefiele v Federal Government of Nigeria (Unreported, FHC/ABJ/CS/2024).

 

 

7. Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners (RPC) 2023.

 

 

8. National Judicial Council (NJC), Circular on Pre-Election and Ex Parte Orders (2022).