A Response to Prof. Odinkalu: Criticism is Not a Substitute for Facts

The recent comments by Prof. Chidi Odinkalu regarding the Edo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal judgment, as reported in various media outlets, are as unfortunate as they are unbecoming of a senior member of the bar. While Prof. Odinkalu is entitled to his opinion, it is imperative to assert that unsubstantiated allegations, inflammatory rhetoric, and sweeping generalizations do not serve the cause of justice, nor do they reflect the intellectual rigour expected of a legal scholar.

Odinkalu’s assertion that the judiciary has been “captured” by politicians is not only sensationalist but also undermines the integrity of a core democratic institution without presenting any cogent evidence. His blanket condemnation of the judiciary as “beneath a joke” speaks more to personal bias than to legal analysis. It is especially disheartening to hear such claims from someone who has benefited from the very same judicial system he now disparages.

Specifically, his characterization of the Edo tribunal as “a disgrace” and the claim that the judges acted as “counsel for the APC” is a serious accusation, bordering on contempt. If Prof. Odinkalu has credible evidence of misconduct or bias, the appropriate channels exist to pursue redress, including the National Judicial Council. Resorting to name-calling and politicized commentary, however, does nothing but erode public confidence in the rule of law.

His insinuation that the President of the Court of Appeal is somehow beholden to politicians like Nyesom Wike is particularly reckless. It is a dangerous path to take when public figures begin to attack judges not on the basis of their rulings, but because of imagined associations or familial ties. This line of reasoning not only lacks substance, it borders on conspiracy theory.

Judgments are not popularity contests. Courts decide based on evidence, pleadings, and applicable laws—not emotions, party affiliations, or media narratives. The tribunal’s decision to uphold the election of APC’s Okpebholo may be disappointing to some, but that in itself does not constitute evidence of bias or capture. The proper response in a democracy is to challenge the decision through the appellate system—which the PDP has already done—not to mount a media campaign to discredit the judiciary.

We must resist the growing trend of politicizing every judicial outcome. This behavior does not strengthen our democracy—it weakens it. Criticism is welcome, but it must be grounded in facts and respect for due process. When we lose that, we lose the essence of the rule of law.