There is a growing concern in Nigeria’s justice system—one that is not always visible in court rulings, but is evident in what does not happen.
The case involving Asabe Waziri is a textbook example.
At its core, this is not a complicated matter. A civil society organization, Global Integrity Crusade Network, GICN, mlis simply asking the court to compel the police to release an investigation report into a fatal incident that occurred over a decade ago.
Yet nearly two years later, the case remains stalled.
Delay as a Strategy
What makes this case troubling is not just the delay—but the pattern the processes:
The police delayed their participation, Court dates have come and gone with little progress and respondents have failed to fully engage
And then there is the role of Asabe Waziri.
Despite the case being directed at the police, she inserted herself into the proceedings as a respondent. On the surface, this may appear procedural. In reality, it has had the effect of slowing down the process and diffusing focus.
The Power of Position
Waziri’s affiliation with a major national institution raises uncomfortable but necessary questions.
Is her position enabling:
A lack of urgency from authorities?
Institutional reluctance to act?
A system that bends—subtly but effectively—around power?
Even without explicit interference, influence can operate quietly:
Through delays rather than denials
Through process rather than decisions
Through inaction rather than overt obstruction
A System Under Pressure
The most telling detail is this: the case is not asking for a conviction—only for the release of information.
Yet even that has proven difficult.
This raises a deeper concern:
If transparency itself is resisted, what does that say about accountability?
The Human Cost
Behind every adjournment is a family still waiting.
Behind every procedural delay is a truth still hidden.
And behind every unanswered question is a growing perception that justice is not blind—but selective.
The Way Forward
The call to reassign the case is more than administrative—it is symbolic.
It reflects a loss of confidence in the pace of proceedings and a demand for impartiality.
Because at the end of the day, justice is not just about outcomes.
It is about timeliness, transparency, and trust.
And right now, all three are under strain.
