Who will reform the Court of Appeal?
The Court of Appeal risks institutional paralysis when it fails to honour its own explicit bench undertakings.
Two weeks ago, we appeared before an appellate bench to argue an urgent stay application under Rule 5(2)(b). Mindful of the catastrophic risk of execution before the substantive ruling reserved for February 2027, the learned Judges gave an unequivocal undertaking to communicate their directions on a temporary conservatory order by the close of business that very day.
Fourteen days later, silence reigns. Inquiries with the Registrar yield nothing. Meanwhile, on the ground, the subject matter of the dispute is being actively dismantled.
The purpose of approaching the Court of Appeal under a certificate of urgency is to preserve the substratum of an appeal so justice is not rendered an academic exercise. When a bench retreats into chambers and abandons a bench undertaking while the subject matter is decimated, the court defeats its constitutional mandate under Article 159 to deliver justice without undue delay.
Who will reform the Court of Appeal? Real reform will not emerge from polite committee meetings. It requires strict administrative accountability from the Judicial Service Commission, disciplined bench management by the Court’s leadership, and an organized, uncompromising Bar that insists on measurable standards and punctuality.