Former Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, Prof. Chidi Odinkalu, has raised concerns about the credibility and transparency of the National Judicial Council’s (NJC) judicial appointment process.

Odinkalu’s post on X (formerly Twitter), warned that without clear assurances on how submitted information would be handled, members of the public were unlikely to engage meaningfully with the NJC’s invitation for feedback on judicial nominees.

The NJC recently released a list of 80 candidates for judicial appointments across superior courts of record: 53 to High Courts, 20 to Sharia Courts of Appeal, 7 to Customary Courts of Appeal, and 2 as Chief Judges of States.

The Council had invited the public to submit relevant information about the candidates within 14 days and warned that false or malicious submissions would attract consequences. An email address ([email protected]) was also provided for feedback.

While acknowledging the move as a step forward, Odinkalu said it remains inadequate.

 “The announcement does not disclose what will happen after the 14-day window,” he said. “People who don’t have credible assurance about how their information will be used are unlikely to participate with enthusiasm.”

He further questioned whether the NJC could process the potentially large volume of digital feedback it may receive, especially in an era dominated by open-source data.

Drawing from past experiences, Odinkalu noted that feedback from the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) on judicial appointments was routinely ignored under the immediate past Chief Justice of Nigeria.

In one recent case involving a prominent High Court, requests for NBA comments were sent only after the process had effectively concluded. Consequently, applications from non-insider candidates were discarded, and the appointments went to relatives of influential figures — a practice he described as “brazen looting of judicial appointments.”

He stated that superficial gestures such as public calls for input mean little without transparency, accountability, and demonstrable action.

“If the NJC wants to be taken seriously, it must show that it can meaningfully process the information it receives — and that such information will influence outcomes,” Odinkalu said.