Exploring the Panacea to the Disparity in Courtroom Decisions: Lessons from Nigeria and the United Kingdom
Uniport Journal of Private Law, Vol. 3(1)2018
16 Pages Posted: 14 Aug 2018
Date Written: July 29, 2018
It is common knowledge among learned men that, the essential scheme that propels human existence is fairness and justice. Law arguably, is the nucleus of the societal configuration without which fairness and justice cannot fully interlink with general human activities. Human endeavours therefore, revolve around economics whereby, decision making propels free market economics. In essence, human decisions on daily survival cannot be guaranteed in the face of insecurity of property and the negation of the obligations we owe to one another in social and other forms of contracts. Many institutions, including the courts assist to protect property; aid in the enforcement of contracts and, regulate human conduct. Alongside the courts, other governmental institutions are meant to secure property rights and enforce contracts however, where the public regulatory system is captured by the powerful and corrupt violators, there has to be transparent and sturdy court system to restrain recklessness. By drawing comparisons from Nigeria and the United Kingdom and by adopting the analytical methodologies of law, criminology and forensic legal psychology, this article explores the nature, extent and effects of disparity in courtroom decisions. It concludes that the discriminatory practices of judges and magistrates cannot be totally eliminated, but that certain well-designed tools of reasoning could be directed towards the minimisation of the problem and its consequences.
Keywords: Judicial Discretion, Rulings, Judgment, Equity, Justice
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation