❐: Chapter 1 – 5
♣:₦3, 000
❑: Ms Word format

: Get complete project material

This study, “‘DO JUDGES MAKE LAW?’ A CURSORY LOOK AT THE RECURRING QUESTION” contains concise information that will serve as a framework or guide for your project work. The project study is well-researched for academic purposes and are usually provided in complete chapters with adequate References.





It is common knowledge that the age long principle of Separation of powers allocates

the governmental functions of law making, law implementation and law

interpretation to the Legislative, Executive and Judicial arms of government

respectively and each arm is to function independently without any unwarranted


It is trite that the function of lawmaking for peaceful coexistence and orderliness in

the society is vested in the recognized law making organ, in the Nigerian case being

the National or States House of Assembly as the case may be. It is however evident

in practical reality, due to the application of certain concepts like Judicial Review,

Checks and balances amongst others and the evolution of the idea of case law and

stare decisis that the law interpretation duty of the Judiciary and the legislative duty

of law making appear overlapping. This seeming power usurpation on the part of the

judiciary has been a subject of great debate for centuries. While some opine that the

functioning of the judges is simply reflective of law interpretation others reason that

judges are intruding into legislative business and accuse judges of judicial activism

and a seemingly more objective school project that effective judicial functioning is

inevitably linked to legislative functioning. In the mist of all these the judges

themselves have taken both affirmative and dissenting stands and one wonders where

to get answers the seemingly unanswered question “Do judges make laws?”

This work touches the practical and legal stand on the issue of whether Judges make

laws giving cognizance to ex cathedra Statutory and Judicial authorities alongside

scholarly arguments relevant to the issue.




Law is central to national governance and a nation can succinctly be described as a

group of persons within a defined geographical confine and guided by given set of

laws with a recognized governmental structure to make, execute and interpret the

given set of laws. The whole idea of governance is circumvented around the idea of

law hence the governmental functioning cannot be successfully defined without

reference in one way or the other of the idea of law.

For the governance and smooth running of any society, law has to be made, executed

and interpreted. Recorded history started with the periods when the tripartite function

of law making, execution and interpretation were either entirely or to a large extent

left in the hands of a unilateral body – in most cases being the monarch and his/her

council. Everyone assumed that government required unification of authority. Louis

the XIV of France puts bluntly: “L’etat est moi” (the state is mine). This no doubt

led to tyranny since as scholarly opinion puts it.


“It is foolhardy to give to law-makers the power of executing law, because in the

process they might exempt themselves from obedience and suit the law (both in

making and executing it) to their individual interest”1.

This tyrannical posture thrived until the early period of renaissance when scholarly

and social scientific ideology led to the development of the idea of separation of

powers which advanced that the functions of law making, execution and

interpretation be put in the hands of three distinct bodies namely; the Legislature, the

Executive and the Judiciary. These bodies were subsequently coined the three arms

of government and are ordinarily expected to function independently without any

unwarranted interloping.

With this structure in place, the judges being the arbiters of the Judiciary were given

the function of law interpretation. The Legislature on the other hand being the

elected representatives of the people served as law makers. The legislators by

conceited effort try to ensure that laws are made with utmost clarity of diction/words

and that laws cover for all anticipated and unanticipated situations and exigency but

this has seemed elusively impossible and as a result the legislature is faced daily with

the onus of not only of creating clarity in the face of unclear and ambiguous

legislation but also of “filling in the gap” where the legislature fails to legislate on an

1 Aihe D. 0 et al “Cases and Materials on Constitutional Law in Nigeria”( University Press Plc,



unanticipated issue which may arise from changing societal trends and scientific

advancement. The legislature may also by the inherent weakness of human nature

use words which cannot reasonably be held to reflect legislative intention and as

such cannot be given effect to unless such errors are corrected by judicial

pronouncement. Legislation is also filled with the use of words like “reasonable

time”, “inordinate delay” amongst others which require time and circumstance

related interpretation.

The above practice of creating clarity, correction of seeming legislative errors, giving

fixed circumstantial interpretation to vague words and “filling in the gaps” has led to

the development of what is referred to as case law which is binding through the

doctrine of stare decisis which dictates that the decision made by a court in one case

is binding on the court and other lower courts in later cases involving similar issue.

The evolution of case law and the seemingly overlapping function of the judiciary

have led to the recurring question of whether judges are law makers.


The legislature is to make the law, the executive to execute the law and the judiciary

to interpret the law so dictates the age long principle of separation of powers. No

human person is all seeing, all wise and none can predict with utter assurance the

turn of events in due course of time so dictates the inevitable law of human nature.

No one, not even the legislator in whom the confidence of the people who look


forward to a better society is placed is above error. Error is inherent in human nature

and the legislators being humans make error in legislation. Who stands to correct

such error? Who but the judge who sits to grant fair hearing to the people over whom

he adjudicates?

Legislators are neither omniscient nor clairvoyant. Social advancement and

skyrocketing scientific innovations in most instances outpace legislation when the

legislators are understandably busy with other attention needing and pressing societal

issues. To cover for this the House of Lords essayed ex cathedra:

“The courts having discovered the intention of Parliament … must proceed to fill in

the gaps. What the legislature has not written, the courts must write’2.

This however must be done having due regards to the affectionate admonition that:

“The judge should never while exercising his interpretative jurisdiction, be

permitted to wear the cloak of an oracle or be upgraded to a demagogic fuehrer but

should always remain a dispenser of justice”3.

In the Nigerian milieu and under Nigerian law, the Constitution clearly allocates

Judicial Powers and interpretative functions as regards the law to the Courts4 and

allocates quasi-legislative powers to the courts in certain sections5. Juristic and

2 Awa Kalu “Do judges make laws?” Vanguard Newspaper (Nigeria 21st March 2003) 51

3 Kayode Eso “Interpretation of statutes in Nigeria” in Further Thoughts on Law and Jurisprudence.

Pp. 310-311.

4 S.6, Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999

5 S.46(3), s.236 and s.248 of Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999


scholarly postulations on the issue of whether judges make laws or not have been

both affirmative and dissenting, and one wonders where to get answers to the

recurring question. There is a need to create unambiguous clarity on the issues of

case law, Judicial Review, Judicial activism, stare decisis and other connected issues

which are central to giving a buoyant answer to the recurring question and this work

stands to serve that purpose.


This work aims at creating unambiguous clarity on the functions and duty of the

judges and their role in the law making process.

It aims at recapitulating the concepts of separation of powers, checks and balances

and judicial review, these concepts being central to understanding the judicial

functioning and answering the question of whether judges make laws.

Determining if “filling in the gaps”, creating time and circumstance related meaning

for vague words used by the legislature, correction of seeming legislative errors and

other judicial practices of the same nature can be regarded as law making is also an

objective of this work.

Summarily, the work aims at going beyond the sphere of legal theory and exploring

the realm of practical reality in the midst of so many consenting and dissenting views


on the issue of whether judges make laws or not, to take a balanced, objective and

empirical stand on the topic question.


This work focuses on the jurisprudential and empirical argument on the role of the

judiciary and on whether judges make laws in Nigeria. It delves into the role of the

judges in the law making process having cognizance to the doctrines of separation of

powers, checks and balances, judicial review, filling in the gaps and other concepts

and realities relevant to giving an unequivocal answer to the question of whether

judges make laws.


Though this work delves into a globally significant issue, it is however concerned

more with and as such restricted to the rules guiding law making and the judicial

process in Nigeria and serves to answer the question “do judges make laws?” in the

Nigerian milieu. Worthy of note however is the fact that despite the territorial

restriction, the work is not devoid of reference (both in case law, statutory law,

juristic arguments and scholarly postulations) to other Commonwealth jurisdictions.

These references do not serve to widen the territorial scope of the work but to further

buttress the issues therein.



This work explores both primary and secondary sources of information, the primary

sources being the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Statutes and

Case law while the secondary sources include textbooks, dictionaries, juristic articles

and other materials necessary for the achievement of the aims of this study


This thesis touches on eclectic scholarly views and works on the question “Do judges

make laws?” The more prominent view that law is primarily made by the legislature

and interpreted by the Judges is held by Francis Bacon who emphasizes that the role

of the judge is only “to interpret law and not to make law or give law”6

Oguntade G. in “Dissenting judgments and judicial law making”7 takes a bifurcate

stand on the issue of whether judges do make laws or not. Raising the, question

directly he says;

“Do judges make laws? The answer to this seemingly rhetorical question is No. but

it is neither a resounding no nor an unqualified answer in the negative”.

He comments further that:

6 Bacon F. “Of Judicature” in Essays (1625) (Everyman Edition 1979) p 162.

7 Ogunlade G. “Dissenting judgments and judicial law making:

<www.allafrica.com/stories/201002250434.html >assessed on 20 December, 2010.


“We know that judges do more than just apply the law as it is. They sometimes

extend it and at other times create new laws that remain binding on all until

reversed, or overruled by courts competent to do so”.

Arguing without any prejudice to fact that law making is primarily the Legislatures

function. Asein J. O. in Introduction to Nigerian Legal System points out that judges

play some role in the lawmaking process. According to him;

“The primary duty of law making is that of the legislature and judges do not go

about making laws in the same manner and with the same ease as the legislators do

but they are not altogether detached from the legislative process8.

Arguing further he stresses that a judge faced with a legal problem does not have to

resign helplessly because the legal rules are inadequate to resolve the conflict. He

advocates on they ground that;

“Judges are therefore encouraged to formulate fresh rules of law or to extend the

existing ones to deal with novel cases”9.

Reacting to denials of judicial law making, Lord Reid derides all such denials as a

belief in fairy tales which has stood long for too long time. In his clerical publication

8 Asein J. O. Introduction to Nigerian legal system (Sam Bookman Publishers Ibadan. 1998) 67.

9 .ibid


“The Judge as law maker” he puts forth positive and empirical argument stating

categorically that “we do not believe in fairy tales anymore”10.

Kolajo pointing out that Judge generally deny that they do make laws in his book

“An Introduction to Law” admits up front that they do. In his work he comments


‘‘Judges in general, do not always admit that they make new laws. The duty of

making law, they contend, is that of the legislative. In reality however, Judges at

times make laws. Judicial decisions and pronouncement over a period of time,

especially when the decisions and pronouncements are confirmed by superior

courts, more or less become law”11.

Elegido in “Jurisprudence” takes a radically different posture from Bacon’s.

Admitting that judges do make laws, he posits that what should be of concern is

whether they should do so. According to him;

“That judge engage in law making is beyond controversy… The real problem is not

whether the; judges engage in law making but rather whether they should do so

,and subject to what limits”12.

Imam, I. in “The myth of Judicial Activism in Nigeria: Making sense of Supreme

Court Judgments”13 berated the Legislature’s failure (particularly at constitutional

10 Lord Reid “The Judge as law maker” in 12 Journal of the Society of Public Teachers of Law (1972)


11 Kolajo, A.A. “An Introduction to Law (spectrum Law series, 2005) p.22

12 Elegido “Jurisprudence” (Spectrum Law Publishers, 2007 Reprint) p. 303-4


amendment in 2007 and rebuking the legislature for more often than not impending

progressive development of Nigeria points out that judges do make laws and judicial

law making is a necessity. To him;

“Legislation to fill vacuum in the constitution may be cumbersome, more so the

rigidity of the procedure for constitutional amendment do not help matters, thus

judicial activism.., has become imperative. The pace of change may he great

bringing with it new social and economic conditions and demands for the

recognition of novel claims. In such circumstance there may be peculiar need for

judicial activism14.

Oputa taking a similar stand on the existence and necessity of judicial law making

averred in “Judicial Activism. A catalyst for political stability” that:

In a progressive world, the law and the administration of justice cannot afford to be

static and retrogressive… we are not to fold our hands and do nothing. No. Our

judges have to interpret the law such that it makes sense to our citizens in


13 Irnam, I. “The Myth Of Judicial Activism In Nigeria: Making Sense Of Supreme Court Judgments.



accessed on 15th December, 2010.

14 ibid p. 19.

15 Oputa JSC: Judicial Activism: A catalyst for Political stability. Guardian Newspaper (Nigeria 16

September, 2003) 7


Niki Tobi in his book “Sources of Nigerian Law” rules out the justification of

judicial law making on the basis of circumstantial necessity. Reacting to whether

.judges make laws or not He points out that;

“Although judges generally deny that they make they make the law at times, the

truth is that they do”16.

Reacting to the justifications of judicial law making, he laments that;

While the need for the daily growth of law to reflect the daily changing

circumstances of society is a desideration, the answer is not necessarily in judicial

law making, particularly when the action of the judge totally changes the content of

the statute this throwing over board the intention of the legislature”17.

He admonishes that since the judges are quick to frown at Legislative and Executive

usurpation of Judicial powers, the judges should also strictly mind their business and

desist from usurpation of the legislative role of lawmaking: Concluding, he warns


“The judge has himself to blame for him boldness which has no support in the laws

the land including all canons of statutory interpretation”

Lord Davis, circumventing the question and stating that there is no consensus on the

precise function of judge observed that;

16 Niki Tobi “Sources of Nigerian Law (M.J. professional publishers, Lagos, 2007

reprint). P.80

17 ibid


“Whatever judge does, he will surely have his critics. If in an effort to do justice he

appears to make law, there will be cries that he is overweening and that he has

rendered uncertain what has been regarded as established legal principles. On the

other hand, if he sticks to the old legal rules, an equally vocal body will charge him

of failing to mould the law to social needs”18.


This chapter sets the pace for this work. It gives a clear introduction and background

to the work going further to set its scope and focus. It gives an exposure of the

research methodology adopted therein and highlights some of the Juristic literatures

which are of importance to the topic issue and thus used in the work.

18 Lord Davis “Judicial Activism. Current Legal problems (1975) culled from lmam. I. ibid. p.2






Have you made payment for this project? If YES, contact our Customer Care.

For further enquiries, call our Hotlines ☎: 08139342394 or 08152487601





DISCLAIMER: hiWriters.com.ng focus on attracting students and researchers to materials that can be used as guide, framework, and reference for their project work. All contents/materials on this website are for research purposes only and for no reason should you copy verbatim. This platform is not encouraging any form of plagiarism, neither are we advocating the use of the project materials for cheating. We strictly recommend that research project topics and materials ordered for should serve as a guide or framework only. The contents therein should be used to generate fresh ideas for your own research. Finally, hiWriters.com.ng will not be liable for any material used inappropriately.