The National Judicial Council (NJC) disclosed in a letter dated 24 March that it forwarded a petition from former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai against Federal High Court Justice RM Aikawa on 21 March 2025. As of November 2025, Justice Aikawa had not responded to the petition, prompting the NJC to contact the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court. The judge's response was eventually received on 15 December 2025, and the matter is now before the NJC's Preliminary Complaints Assessment Committee. The delay of nine months in responding to a formal communication has raised questions about judicial accountability and the authority of the NJC. El-Rufai's petition relates to Justice Aikawa's July 2024 ruling in a case involving the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC) at the Federal High Court in Kaduna. Despite the pending petition, Justice Aikawa has not indicated any intention to recuse himself from the case. A Court of Appeal ruling on 17 March upheld El-Rufai's challenge to the July 2024 decision, adding further scrutiny to the judge's conduct. The NJC's letter to El-Rufai provided a detailed timeline of the process, including the delay in receiving the judge's response.
Justice RM Aikawa's nine-month silence on a formal NJC petition raises a troubling question: do some judicial officers see the council's authority as optional? That a judge under formal complaint could delay a response for nearly a year without consequence suggests a systemic imbalance in how accountability is enforced within the judiciary. The NJC's transparency in revealing the delay is notable, but the fact that such delay is possible at all undermines public trust in judicial oversight.
The case unfolds against a backdrop of growing public scrutiny of judicial conduct, especially in politically sensitive matters. Justice Aikawa's continued handling of the ICPC case involving El-Rufai, despite a clear conflict of interest and a successful appeal against his earlier ruling, signals a disregard for procedural fairness. The NJC, as the constitutionally mandated body for judicial accountability, appears constrained by passive compliance, relying on goodwill rather than enforceable timelines. When a judge's inaction stretches over nine months and the process remains in preliminary assessment after a full year, the mechanism risks becoming a procedural shield rather than a corrective tool.
Ordinary Nigerians who rely on the judiciary for impartiality in disputes are directly affected when such delays go unchecked. If a former governor struggles to get a timely response, citizens without public platforms face even greater obstacles. This erodes confidence in the system's ability to self-correct.
A pattern is emerging where judicial accountability processes are marked by long delays and minimal consequences, suggesting a culture of impunity that transcends individual cases.
