RULE OF LAW ABOVE POWER: THE CASE FOR DUE PROCESS IN NIGERIA

 _Lessons from Chief Uche Geoffrey Nnaji vs University of Nigeria, Nsukka_ 

The strength of any democracy is measured not by the power of its political actors but by the supremacy of the rule of law over all persons and institutions. Where due process prevails, democracy endures; where it is undermined, arbitrariness takes root.

The legal dispute between Chief Uche Geoffrey Nnaji and the University of Nigeria, Nsukka (UNN) presents a defining moment for Nigeria’s constitutional order and democratic culture. Beyond personalities, this case raises a fundamental question: Will institutions submit to lawful scrutiny, or will power override accountability?

Chief Nnaji’s public response to allegations concerning his academic records departs sharply from Nigeria’s familiar culture of intimidation, suppression, and political shortcuts. Rather than deploy influence or coercion, he chose the judicial path—invoking the courts to compel disclosure, verification, and institutional transparency. In doing so, he reaffirmed a core democratic principle: no allegation should be resolved in the media when lawful mechanisms exist for resolution.

More significantly, Chief Nnaji voluntarily stepped aside from public office to protect the integrity of the investigative process. This act stands as a rare but powerful affirmation that public office is a trust, not a shield against accountability. In a polity where resignation is often treated as an admission of guilt, his action reframed resignation as a tool for preserving institutional credibility and public confidence.

The decision to submit the matter to judicial determination also underscores a vital rule-of-law tenet: institutions must be accountable to citizens just as citizens are accountable to institutions. Universities, as custodians of knowledge and truth, bear an elevated obligation to transparency, record-keeping, and responsiveness to lawful requests. Compliance with court processes is not optional; it is foundational to democratic governance.

The unfolding proceedings—now involving senior university officials—highlight the broader implications of the case. At stake is not merely individual reputation, but the integrity of institutional processes, the right to fair hearing, and the limits of administrative discretion in a constitutional democracy. Where falsehood or negligence is established, the law provides remedies, including redress for reputational harm. Where innocence is established, the law equally demands public vindication.

This case therefore serves as a civic lesson: allegations must be proven, institutions must be accountable, and justice must be allowed to run its full course. Resorting to smear campaigns, trial-by-media, or political manipulation weakens democratic culture and erodes public trust.

A nation governed by law does not fear the courts. It strengthens them.

By choosing restraint over retaliation and law over expediency, Chief Uche Geoffrey Nnaji has placed the spotlight where it belongs—on due process, transparency, and institutional responsibility. His approach reinforces the principle that democracy matures when citizens and institutions alike submit to lawful scrutiny.

Nigeria’s future as a constitutional democracy depends not on personalities, but on precedents.

The rule of law must remain supreme.

Chief Emeka Ede

A public affairs analyst