Public Perception Of Criminal Justice In Nigeria: Preliminary Report

Project: Monitoring the Criminal Justice Administration reform process in Nigeria

A component of the project is to conduct two perception surveys on the effectiveness of administration of justice in Nigeria.

This first round of public perception survey on Administration of Criminal Justice in Nigeria was conducted in February 2017 by CLEEN Foundation in collaboration with Practical Sampling International (PSI). The purpose of the survey is to:

·       To assess the ACJA effectiveness and strengthen its implementation

·        Provide reliable and credible data and information for the public on the administration of criminal justice in Nigeria.

The aim of the study was to obtain a better understanding of the perception and assessment of the criminal justice system and the Implementation of the Administration of the Criminal Justice Act (ACJA).

Data collection

The survey consisted of 5099 respondents drawn from five states and Abuja (Federal Capital Territory, treated as a State in North Central for this Survey). The survey was conducted Abuja and Adamawa, Cross River, Imo, Kaduna and Lagos States. The sample consists of two sub-samples: respondents drawn from the public and special professional group comprising police, lawyers, judicial staff etc.

The basic methodology employed for data collection was in-home, face-to-face personal interview using a modified, multi-stage random selection procedure to achieve a representative sample.

The Questionnaire was in CAPI format in which Tablet- Devices were used to elicit information on the project. Respondents in the sub-sample drawn from the public were males and females aged eighteen years and older, who had stayed in the selected household for a period of not less than six months. Non-citizens of Nigeria and people living in institutionalized settings were not part of the respondents.

Sub-sample comprising professionals consists of Lawyers, Registrars, Police, Judges/Magistrate, Civil Servant (MOJ), Office of Directorate of Public Prosecutions.

There were 2669 males and 2430 females in the sample. The sub-sample comprising professionals had 420 males and females. The public sub-sample comprise 2,249 males and 2,240 females, almost an equal representation.

The fieldwork commenced in Lagos, Abuja, Kaduna, Imo, and Cross River State on the 6^th of March 2107 Only Adamawa started on 7^th of March 2017 due to Logistic. Fieldwork and quality control activities on this project end across the study on the 16^th of March 2017.  Therefore, Fieldwork for the project lasted for 11 days including weekends i.e. from 6^th of March 2017 to 16^th of March 2017.

Sampling Procedure

Respondents’ selection followed a clustered, stratified, multi stage random selection process thus:

• Stratify and random selection of Sector
• Random selection of sampling start points
• Random selection of households
• Selection of eligible respondents.

Samples were drawn from the following Local Government Areas of the States

§         Abuja: Abuja Municipal, Bwari

§         Adamawa: Yola North and Yola South

§         Kaduna: Chikun, Kaduna North and Kaduna South

§         Imo: Owerri-Municipal, Owerri North and Owerri West

§         Cross River: Odukpani, Calabar South and Calabar Municipality

§         Lagos: Alimosho, Ajeromi-Ifelodun, Kosofe, Mushin, Oshodi-Isolo, Surulere, Agege, Ifako-Ijaye, Shomolu. Amuwo-Odofin, Ikeja, and Lagos Island        

Sample size = 5099

Abuja – 764

Adamawa – 714

Kaduna – 1239

Imo – 643

Cross River – 770

Lagos - 969

Field work by Practical Sampling International (PSI) Lagos

ANALYSIS

Familiarity with the police, courts and prisons in Nigeria

Familiarity with police

A little more than one-fifth (21.9%) of the respondent were very familiar with the police; 47.2% were familiar with the police; 16.8% were somewhat familiar and 13.9% were not familiar. More than two-third (69.1%) were either very familiar of familiar with the police.

There were variations in the extent of familiarity with the police by respondents in the six states. Those who responded being very familiar and familiar with the police across the states were 73.8% (Abuja, FCT); Adamawa (70.6%); Kaduna (74.8%); Imo (78.7%); Cross River (57.2%) and Lagos (60.3%). Familiarity of citizens with the police was highest in Imo State and lowest in Lagos State. 

Familiarity with the Courts

More than one-half (55.3%) of the respondents were either very familiar (15.4%) and familiar (39.9%) with the courts. Less than a fifth (18.9%) of the respondents were somewhat familiar with the courts and 25.0% were not familiar with the judicial agency. Extent of familiarity with the courts vary across the states covered by the study. Those who were either very familiar or familiar with courts in the states were 60.4% (Abuja FCT); 57.8% (Adamawa); 62.2% (Kaduna); 71.2% (Imo); 41.5% (Cross River) and 41.6% (Lagos State).

Familiarity with prisons

Less than a half (48.7%) of the respondents from the six states were either very familiar (12.6%) or familiar (34.2) with the prisons in the country. In contrast, 22.0% were somewhat familiar and 24.9% were not familiar. Extent of familiarity (very familiar/familiar) in the states were 52.0% (Abuja, FCT); 50.5% (Adamawa); 56.0% (Kaduna); 63.2% (Imo); 35.8% (Cross River) and 36.2% (Lagos). Significantly, 44.3% of the respondents in Cross River State and 47.9% in Lagos State said they were not familiar with the prisons.

As expected, citizens were most familiar with the police which is the gatekeeping agency in the criminal justice system. Surprisingly, respondents in Lagos State, the most urbanized state in the country, consistently exhibited lowest familiarity with the three criminal justice agencies.

More than two-fifths (41.0%) of the respondents demanded for the services of the police in the previous twelve months and a quarter (25.4%) demanded for the services of lawyers. More than one-fifth demanded for the services of the courts. The high level of demand for services of criminal justice agencies may be partly explained by the existence a sub-sample of legal practitioners and law enforcement agencies.

Services of the criminal justice agencies were utilized more by respondents in Imo and Lagos states and Abuja (Federal Capital Territory).

Effectiveness of criminal justice and law enforcement agencies

Criminal justice agencies were generally considered effective by more than a half of the respondents in each state covered by the study. The only exception was in Abuja where 38.0% considered the prison effective (table 3)

Trend of performance of criminal justice and law enforcement agencies over past year

Majority of the respondents across the states reported improvement in the performance of the criminal justice agencies over the past year. Respondents in Imo and Lagos States reported the highest and lowest levels of improvement of performance by criminal justice, judicial and law enforcement agencies (table 4)

Most important constraint affecting criminal justice administration in Nigeria

Respondents across the states reported that lack of proper investigation and prosecution as well as corruption by the police were the two most important constraints affecting criminal justice administration in the country. Several other constraints were identified by the respondents (table 5).

Police behaviour and rule of law

Majority of respondents did not think that police always or often act according to law, respect the rights of citizens and receive punishment for violating the law. More than two-fifths, however, reported that they sometimes act according to the law and respect the rights of citizens, and assist citizens in distress (table 6).

Effectiveness of police in investigation, arrest and prosecution

More than a half of the respondents said police were very effective or effective in timely and thorough investigation of crimes apprehension and prosecution of perpetrators of crime (table 7)

Perceptions of police actions and rule of law

Less than a third of the respondents across the states believed police always or often act according to law, respect the rights of citizens and receive punishment for violation of law (table 8).

Perception of effectiveness of the police across states

Respondents in Adamawa, Imo and Cross Rivers States rated effectiveness of the police in timely and thorough criminal investigation as well as apprehension and prosecution of perpetrators of crime. In contrast, respondents in Lagos were more critical of the effectiveness of the police in performing these tasks (table 9).

Critical factors affecting police carrying out timely investigation

Corruption was consistently identified as the critical constraints affecting police carrying out timely investigation. This view was held more by respondents Imo and Adamawa states. Other major constraints identified were incompetence and inadequate funding (table 10).

Critical factors affecting police carrying out thorough investigation

Corruption and incompetence were the two factors identified by respondents across the states as critical constraints affecting thorough investigation by police (table 11).

Critical constraints affecting apprehension and prosecution of offenders

Most important constraints affecting effective apprehension and just prosecution of offenders consistently identified by respondents across the states were corruption, inadequate funding and incompetence (table 12).

Measures for improving apprehension and prosecution of offenders by police

Four measures recommended by greater proportion of respondents across the states for improving apprehension of offenders were proactive investigation method, working closely with communities and collaboration with other security agencies and retraining of personnel. Three major measures recommended for improved prosecution of offenders were adoption of proactive investigation method, working closely with communities and use of scientific and technology aid to investigation (table 13).

Effectiveness of courts in charging suspects and fair administration of justice

Majority of respondents in the states, apart from Abuja, reported that magistrate courts were effective in charging suspects brought before them. The courts were particularly rated very highly by respondents in Imo (72.5%) and Kaduna (67.7%). Asked about the effectiveness of courts in ensuring fair administration of criminal justice, more than a half of the respondents across the states said the courts were effective. More than 70% of the respondents in Imo (75,0%) and Adamawa (70.1%) said the courts were effective in fair administration of criminal process. (table 14).  

  

Usefulness of jail delivery visits to prisons by Chief Judges

A measure designed to ensure that remanded inmates are not unduly detained, and prevent prison overcrowding associated with awaiting trail inmates is visit to prisons by Chief Judges of States. Respondents were asked if such visits are useful and serve the intended purposes. Majority of the respondents believed it was not much or very much useful. However, more than two-fifths (43.1%) of respondents in Adamawa were of the view that such visits were much or very much useful (table 15).

Approaches to effective criminal justice administration

Respondents were asked about measures or approaches to enhance effective criminal adjudication in Nigeria. Measures that were frequently measured by respondents across the states were greater discipline and supervision of judges and lawyers, adequate funding, better training of judges and adequate facilities and equipment (table 16).

Trend of prison break in Nigeria

Prison break was reported to have increased in Imo State by more than two-thirds (43.7%) while respondents in other states reported less increase, for example, Lagos (23.9%) and Adamawa (22.4%) (table 17).

Important causes of prison breaks

Several incidences of prison break were reported in the country over the past decades. During such jail-break, violent and dangerous criminals, including suspects of terrorism, kidnapping and robbery were released. Respondents were asked what they think were the most important causes of prison breaks in the country.  Most frequently identified causes across the states were lack of proper management and oversight of prisons (24.7%); overcrowding and congestion (23.6%) and lack of basic amenities due to inadequate funding (22.7%) (table 18).

Adequacy of services and facilities in Nigerian Prisons

Inadequacy of services and facilities in Nigeria were often reported by officials, government, inmates, human rights advocates. Facilities such as health care, feeding, clothing, recreational facilities and vocational training were generally regarded as grossly lacking. Respondents were asked about adequacy of facilities in Nigerian prisons. Less than half said facilities and services were very adequate of adequate. While respond dents in Adamawa (48.8%); Cross River (46.4%) and Kaduna (44.2%) said the facilities and services were adequate or very adequate, fewer respondents in Abuja (22.3%) and Abuja (28.6%) described the services as adequate or very adequate (table 19).

Best approach to increasing effectiveness for correctional system in Nigeria

Respondents were asked what approaches will increase effectiveness of correctional system in the country. Most frequently identified measures were adequate funding (24.6%); better training of officials (20.1%); better welfare of prisons officials; adequate facilities and equipment (11.8%) and better monitoring and oversight of prisons (table 20).

Critical problems of criminal justice administration in respondents’ state of residence

More than two-thirds of the respondents in each of the states identified the following factors (table 20) as the critical problems of criminal justice administrations in the states where they lived:

a.      Lack of pro-active investigation

b.      Defective mechanisms for obtaining evidence

c.      Inadequate witness protection

d.      Incompetence of investigators

e.      Corrupt police investigators and prosecutors

f.      Lack of prosecutorial independence

g.      Non-adherence to due process and suspects’ rights

h.      Lack of witness support

i.        Inadequate modern equipment

j.       Inadequate facilities

Critical problems of courts in respondents’ state of residence

Respondents were asked about the critical problems affecting the effectiveness of courts in their states of residence. They identified several factors (table 21) as follows:

a.      Excessive pre-trial detention

b.      Delay of cases

c.      Lack of effective monitoring of case status

d.      Poor facilities

e.      Poor judicial decisions

f.      Inadequate resources

g.      Inadequate criminal defence

h.      Inadequate legal aid assistance

i.        Corruption of judges and lawyers

j.       Lack of impartiality amongst judges

k.      Lack of judicial independence

At least a half of the respondents in each of the states identified these problems as critical or very critical (table 21).

Critical problems of the prisons in respondents’ state of residence

Respondents were asked about the critical problems confronting prisons in their states of residence. They identified several factors (table 22) as follows:

a.      Inadequate resources

b.      Poor facilities

c.      0vercrowing and congestion

d.      Delay in presentation of suspects in court for trial

e.      Lack of proper documentation of awaiting trial inmates 

f.      Incompetent prions officials

g.      Corruption of prison officials

h.      Lack of proper management and oversight of prisons

i.        Poor welfare of inmates

j.       Poor condition of service for prison officials

No less than one-half of respondents in each state identified these factors as critical or very critical (table 22).

Assessment of performance of office of State DPP

Office of the DPP at the federal and state levels play critical roles in the prosecution of serious cases, especially in higher courts. Prosecutors in the offices vet case files; offer legal advice on whether to prosecute cases, and undertake prosecutions when required. Respondents were asked about the performance of the DPP in the state. Their performance was rated highly in Imo (73.1) and Adamawa (71.2%) while rated as such by 43.8% in Abuja, the only state where less than 50% rated the performance of the offices as good or very good (table 23).

Reasons for delay in issuance of legal advice by DPPs

In serious cases, there were allegations of delay in rendering legal advice to the police and other law enforcement agencies by the offices of the DPP. Respondents were asked what they considered to be reasons for such delays. Several reasons were offered (table ) as follow:

a.      Delay in transfer of case files by CID

b.      Lack of effective coordination between CID and DPP office

c.      Delays caused by bureaucratic bottlenecks with DPP office

d.      Poor investigation by police

Effects of delay in issuance of legal advice by DPPs

Delay in issuance of legal advice by DPPs impacts on suspects, victims and law enforcement agencies who require them to further process a case. Respondents were asked of the effects of delay in rendering advice on whether to prosecute. They identify the following factors (table 25):

a.      Long pre-trial detention

b.      Violation of suspects’ human rights

c.      Prison overcrowding and congestion

d.      Delayed trial

Violation of human rights was the most cited effect of delay in providing legal advice for prosecution by the offices of DPP

ASSESSMENT OF ACJA

Sample size = 5099

Belong to any of the criminal justice agencies?

% Yes, across sample = 8.6% (439)

Abuja (9.3); Adamawa (10.8%); Kaduna (6.9%); Imo (10.0%); Cross River (8.7) and Lagos (8.6%)

Heard of ACJA?

18.1% of the entire sample

- Abuja (24.6%); Adamawa (19.5%); Kaduna (16.3%); Imo (17.1%); Cross River (18.1%) and Lagos (15.2%)

Familiarity with ACJA

Among the respondents who said they heard about ACJA, 40.3% were familiar with it and 25.7 were very familiar with it. Overall, two-thirds of those who heard about ACJA were familiar with it

Level of familiarity with the law among those who have heard about it was generally high. Comparing the level of familiarity at the state level, those who responded that they were familiar/very familiar were as follow: Abuja (76.4); Adamawa (55.4%); Kaduna (74.8%); Imo (65.4%); Cross River (64.0%) and Lagos (66.0%).

Knowledge of implementation of ACJA

 More than two-thirds (68.0%) of the respondents who said they heard about ACJA reported that they knew that it was being implemented.

Those who reported awareness of the implementation of the law in the states where the study was conducted were Abuja (71.7%); Adamawa (68.5%); Kaduna (73.6%); Imo (45.75); Cross River (71.1%) and Lagos (68.0%)

Satisfaction with the implementation of ACJA

Respondents were satisfied with the implementation of the law. Among the respondents who reported hearing about the law, 86.0% were satisfied {28.3% very satisfied and 58.7% satisfied) with its implementation. Level of satisfaction by respondents across the states were Abuja (82.3%); Adamawa (77.9); Kaduna (92.3%); Imo (93.4%); Cross River (84.8%) and Lagos (94.0%).

Inauguration of the CSO Observatory on ACJA

View of respondents on whether ACJA will improve criminal justice administration

Most of the respondents (93.1%) across the states said the law will improve criminal justice administration system in Nigeria. Respondents in the states were also optimistic that the administration of criminal justice in the country will be improved by the implementation of ACJA as follows: Abuja (96.8%); Adamawa (93.0%); Kaduna (94.7%); Imo (88.9%); Cross River (88.2) and Lagos (92.8%).

Knowledge of existence of ACJA in state where respondents lived

Only a minority (20.6%) of the 5099 respondents in the sample knew of the existence of administration of criminal justice laws in their state of residence. Proportion of respondents in the states who were aware of existence of any such laws in their states where they were living was Abuja (26.35); Adamawa (20.9%); Kaduna (19.2%); Imo (17.1%); Cross River (21.0%) and Lagos (19.8%).

Satisfaction with the implementation of ACJA in state where respondents resided

More than two-thirds (70.8%) of the respondents were satisfied with the implementation of administration of criminal justice laws in their state of residence. Respondents in the different states were also generally satisfied as follows: Abuja (62.8%), Adamawa (67.9%); Kaduna (80.4%); Imo (71.5%); Cross River (64.1%) and Lagos (75.8%).

You can watch the videos

By Liberty TV

By Oak T.V

Link to Inauguration of the CSO Observatory on ACJA Pics

https://www.facebook.com/cleenfoundationn/media_set?set=a.1378525885558700.1073741891.100002039067344&type=3

Download Podcast Audio of  Stakeholders Summit on the Administration of Criminal Justice in Nigeria -  http://www.hulkshare.com/iot1tx4x4q2o

Link to #ACJA_NG Stakeholders Summit Pictures

https://www.facebook.com/cleenfoundationn/media_set?set=a.1377761135635175.1073741890.100002039067344&type=3