Are Nigeria’s Digital Courts Actually Slowing Justice?

Nigeria is investing in e-filing, virtual hearings and digital case management to make courts faster and more accessible. But lawyers say technology can become another source of delay when systems fail or procedures are poorly implemented.

ABUJA, Nigeria — Nigeria’s judiciary is embracing digital technology as part of efforts to modernise court administration, reduce paperwork and tackle delays that have long frustrated lawyers, litigants and ordinary citizens seeking justice.

Electronic filing, virtual hearings, digital case-management systems and online payment platforms are increasingly becoming part of the country’s judicial landscape.

The promise is attractive: fewer physical files, faster filing, easier access to court documents and less time spent travelling or waiting at court registries.

But an important question is emerging from the legal community:

Is court digitalisation actually making justice faster — or are poorly implemented systems creating a new layer of delay?

Concerns raised by some Nigerian lawyers suggest that while judicial technology has enormous potential, technical failures, administrative bottlenecks and inadequate integration between digital and traditional procedures can frustrate the very efficiency the reforms are intended to achieve.

Why Nigeria Is Digitalising Its Courts

Nigeria’s justice system has struggled for years with delays.

Cases can take years to conclude. Adjournments, congested court lists, missing files, administrative procedures and difficulties serving court processes can all contribute.

Digitalisation is intended to address some of these problems.

Instead of requiring lawyers to physically visit a registry every time a document must be filed, an electronic system can potentially allow documents to be submitted remotely.

Virtual hearings can reduce travel and make it possible for certain proceedings to continue without everyone being physically present in the courtroom.

Electronic case management can also make it easier to track cases and reduce dependence on paper records.

In principle, these developments should make justice more efficient.

Implementation, however, is where difficulties can arise.

When Technology Becomes Another Queue

Human-rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Akingbade, has raised concerns about aspects of court digitalisation, arguing that some processes are creating frustration and delays for practitioners.

The problem is not necessarily the idea of digital courts.

It is what happens when lawyers are required to use digital platforms that do not work reliably, when electronic submissions take too long to be processed or when an online procedure is simply added on top of an existing manual process.

A system intended to eliminate bureaucracy can instead create digital bureaucracy.

For example, if a lawyer uploads a document electronically but must still visit the court registry to resolve administrative issues relating to the same filing, much of the advantage of electronic filing disappears.

Similarly, when a platform becomes inaccessible or payments cannot immediately be confirmed, an urgent application may be delayed through no fault of the litigant.

Digital Justice Is More Than Putting Court Forms Online

A truly digital court is not simply a traditional court with a website.

Effective digitalisation requires the entire judicial process to work together.

That includes filing, payment, case assignment, service of processes, document management, hearing schedules, access to judgments and communication between court officials and lawyers.

If only one part is digital while the remaining stages depend on slow manual procedures, the overall case may still move slowly.

Technology therefore cannot solve structural problems merely by transferring them from paper to a computer screen.

Virtual Hearings Have Already Changed Nigerian Justice

One of the most visible changes came during the COVID-19 pandemic, when Nigerian courts increasingly explored remote hearings.

The experience accelerated discussions about technology and access to justice.

Virtual hearings can provide substantial advantages.

Lawyers may participate without travelling long distances. Witnesses can potentially give evidence remotely where legally appropriate. Courts may also handle some applications without requiring everyone to be physically present.

For a country as geographically large as Nigeria, those advantages can be significant.

But virtual justice also depends on electricity, reliable internet access, suitable equipment and technological competence.

A lawyer in Lagos or Abuja with high-speed internet may have a very different experience from a litigant or practitioner in a community with unstable connectivity.

That creates an important access-to-justice concern.

Could Digitalisation Create a New Inequality?

The Constitution guarantees access to courts and protects the right to fair hearing.

Technology should therefore expand access to justice rather than make participation dependent on someone’s ability to afford sophisticated equipment or reliable internet service.

Nigeria has significant differences in digital infrastructure between locations and individuals.

If an essential court procedure becomes exclusively digital, what happens to a litigant who does not own a computer?

What about a rural lawyer dealing with unreliable internet connectivity?

What happens when a filing deadline expires while a court portal is unavailable?

These are not merely technological questions.

They can become fair-hearing questions.

Lawyers Also Have Responsibilities

Not every difficulty associated with digital courts can be blamed on the judiciary.

Legal practitioners must also adapt.

Lawyers increasingly need basic digital skills, including electronic document preparation, scanning, online filing, electronic research and participation in virtual proceedings.

Law firms that continue operating entirely through paper processes may struggle as courts modernise.

Digital reform therefore requires investment not only from government and the judiciary but also from the legal profession.

Cybersecurity and Privacy Cannot Be Ignored

Court records can contain extremely sensitive information.

Witness statements, addresses, financial information, medical records, evidence, corporate documents and personal details may all become part of litigation.

Moving such information into electronic systems creates cybersecurity responsibilities.

Court technology must therefore include strong protections against unauthorised access, manipulation, data loss and cyberattacks.

The public must be confident not only that electronic records are accessible but also that they are authentic and secure.

A digital justice system that cannot protect its records could create problems far more serious than misplaced paper files.

Technology Cannot Fix Judicial Delay by Itself

Nigeria should also avoid expecting computers to solve problems that are fundamentally institutional.

Technology cannot compensate for an insufficient number of judges.

It cannot automatically prevent unnecessary adjournments.

It cannot ensure witnesses appear.

It cannot eliminate every delay associated with investigation, prosecution or service of court processes.

And it cannot replace good judicial administration.

Digitalisation should therefore be regarded as one component of broader justice-sector reform.

What Would a Successful Digital Court System Look Like?

For ordinary Nigerians, success should be measured by outcomes rather than the number of computers installed in courthouses.

A successful system should make it easier to file cases, track proceedings and obtain information.

Platforms should be reliable and simple enough for practitioners to use without unnecessary technical barriers.

There should also be clear procedures for situations where technology fails.

A litigant should not lose an important legal right merely because a government-operated court portal malfunctioned.

Court personnel must be properly trained, technical support should be available and digital procedures should be standardised as much as possible.

Most importantly, digitalisation should reduce the number of steps required to obtain justice rather than simply digitising every existing bureaucratic step.

Step Rights Legal Insight

Nigeria should not choose between traditional courts and digital courts as though one must completely replace the other.

The real objective should be a justice system that is faster, fairer and more accessible.

Technology can help achieve that.

Electronic filing can reduce paperwork. Virtual hearings can reduce unnecessary travel. Digital case management can improve transparency and make missing files less common.

But technology is a tool — not justice itself.

When an electronic system works properly, citizens may barely notice the technology because the process simply becomes easier.

When it works badly, however, the technology becomes another obstacle standing between citizens and the courts.

Nigeria’s judicial digitalisation should therefore be judged by one straightforward question:

Does it make it easier and faster for an ordinary person to obtain justice?

If the answer is yes, digitalisation is working.

If lawyers and litigants must fight both the legal dispute and the technology designed to process it, reform is still needed.

Step Rights Magazine — Legal Education | Human Rights | Justice | Accountability

Olayemi- Senior Reporter