Nigeria: Rivers Judge Suspended Without Pay For Jailing Litigants, Imposing N300,000 Fines Without Due Process

The National Judicial Council (NJC) has suspended Justice Sobere Biambo of the Rivers State High Court for one year without pay over his handling of a civil dispute in which he ordered the arrest of litigants and imposed fines of N300,000 on each of them without following the prescribed legal procedures.

The Council also barred the judge from being nominated for elevation to a higher court for three years.

The decisions were taken at the NJC's 112th meeting held on November 3, 2026, under the chairmanship of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun.

In a statement issued on November 4, the Council said it considered nine investigation reports concerning petitions against judicial officers over their handling of cases.

According to the NJC, its Investigation Committee found that Justice Biambo ordered the arrest of petitioners for allegedly disobeying an interim injunction and subsequently imposed fines of N300,000 on each of them.

The committee found that the judge took the action without instituting contempt proceedings or serving the mandatory Forms 48 and 49 on the affected litigants.

It also held that the alleged contempt occurred outside the court's presence and, therefore, could not lawfully be summarily tried and punished.

The NJC consequently approved the committee's recommendation that Justice Biambo be suspended for one year without pay and barred from nomination for elevation for three years.

"Council approved his suspension for one year without pay and a three-year restriction on elevation over the issuance of bench warrants and imposition of fines on litigants in a civil dispute without due process," the statement said.

"The Committee found that he ordered the arrest of the petitioners for alleged disobedience of an interim injunction and subsequently imposed fines of N300,000 on each without the institution of contempt proceedings or service of Forms 48 and 49.

"It held that the alleged contempt occurred outside the court's presence and ought not to have been summarily tried and punished."

"The disciplinary action was among several decisions taken by the Council against judicial officers following investigations into complaints about their conduct," the statement added.