January 19, (THEWILL) – The Federal Government’s establishment of the Presidential Advisory Committee on the Prerogative of Mercy (PACPM) highlights deep-rooted problems within the country’s justice system.
Operating under Section 175 of the 1999 Constitution, this 12-member committee aims to recommend candidates for presidential pardons. However, its creation occurs during a period of significant public distrust in Nigeria’s legal institutions.
The PACPM’s primary function involves identifying and recommending prisoners and ex-convicts for presidential clemency, with emphasis on those who demonstrate rehabilitation potential and minimal risk to society. The Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, chairs the committee, bringing high-level oversight to its operations. The committee’s membership includes distinguished individuals, such as Justice Augustine Utsaha, Professor Alkasum Abba, Chief Akinlolu Olujinmi (SAN), and Professor Nike Sidikat Ijaiya.
Representatives from key institutions complete the roster, including officials from the Nigeria Police Force, Nigerian Correctional Service and the National Human Rights Commission. Religious perspectives are incorporated through representatives from the Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs and the Christian Association of Nigeria. The Permanent Secretary for Special Duties and Governmental Affairs participates in proceedings, while the Director for Special Duties and Intergovernmental Affairs serves the vital role of committee secretary.
I would like to note here that public skepticism toward the justice system stems from numerous examples of inequitable treatment. High-profile cases illustrate this disparity, when former governors, such as Joshua Dariye and Jolly Nyame, received controversial pardons in April 2022 while ordinary citizens faced extended pretrial detention for minor offences.
The 2022 Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project report highlighted the judiciary’s role in prolonging corruption cases involving politically exposed individuals.
The scale of systemic problems becomes even clearer through statistics. Over 70 per cent of Nigeria’s prison population consists of pretrial detainees, according to a 2023 Nigerian Correctional Service data.
A 2022 United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime survey revealed that 22 per cent of people who dealt with the judiciary admitted paying bribes to influence case outcomes.
Infrastructure deficiencies compound these issues. In 2023, it was reported that more than half of rural courtrooms lack basic facilities like electricity and adequate furniture. This deterioration mirrors broader institutional challenges of underfunding, insufficient training, and limited resources.
The PACPM’s effectiveness will depend on several critical factors. In my view, first, transparency in operations and decision-making processes must become standard practice. Without clear visibility into how pardons get recommended, public trust will remain low.
Secondly, the committee needs to establish and publicise specific, non-discriminatory criteria for pardon eligibility. These standards should prioritise genuine rehabilitation and remorse rather than social or political connections.
Public engagement represents another crucial element for success. By involving civil society groups and maintaining open communication about its work, the PACPM could help make the pardon process more understandable and accessible to ordinary citizens. Additionally, focusing on prison overcrowding could lead to meaningful reforms in the correctional system.
However, significant obstacles remain. The discretionary nature of presidential pardons creates concerns about potential abuse. Previous controversial pardons, like that of former Bayelsa State Governor Diepreye Alamieyeseigha in 2013, demonstrate how such powers can be misused for political purposes. The committee must work deliberately to prove its recommendations serve justice rather than political interests.
The PACPM exists within a broader context of necessary judicial reform. Beyond reviewing individual cases, addressing fundamental problems requires sustained investment in infrastructure, training, and institutional capacity. Without these broader changes, the committee risks becoming another well-intentioned but ultimately ineffective attempt at reform.
Success for the PACPM extends beyond simply recommending pardons. Its true measure will be whether it can help transform public perception of Nigeria’s justice system. This requires consistent demonstration that decisions serve the interests of justice, rehabilitation, and equality rather than reinforcing existing power structures.
The committee’s diverse membership offers some promise, suggesting potential for balanced decision-making. Under the leadership of Attorney-General Fagbemi, the mix of legal luminaries, academics, religious leaders, and institutional representatives provides multiple perspectives on each case. The inclusion of senior legal practitioners like Chief Olujinmi (SAN) and distinguished academics such Professors Abba and Ijaiya adds intellectual depth to deliberations. However, final authority rests with the President, whose choices will ultimately determine whether the PACPM becomes a tool for genuine reform or perpetuates current inequities.
Regular assessment of the committee’s impact could provide valuable feedback for improvement. This might include tracking outcomes for pardoned individuals, measuring effects on prison population levels, and gauging public confidence in the process. Such data could guide adjustments to ensure the PACPM fulfils its intended purpose.
The creation of the PACPM represents one step toward addressing problems in Nigeria’s justice system. However, its success requires more than good intentions. Only through transparent operations, fair criteria, and demonstrated commitment to equality can the committee begin rebuilding trust in Nigerian justice. The path forward demands sustained effort to overcome ingrained skepticism and prove that legal mercy serves rehabilitation rather than political convenience.
