It is not in contention that the 2007 elections were fraught with irregularities, to the extent that they were defined variously at home and abroad as far below standard. The major beneficiary of the colossal fraud, Mallam Umaru Yar'Adua, has since his declaration as the winner of the presidential election in April 2007, spoken strongly ón the weaknesses in the nation's electoral system, which culminated in the appointment of the Justice Muhammad Lawal Uwais-led Electoral Reform Committee with a specific mandate to come up with suggestions on how future elections in the country would meet the minimum standards that would be acceptable to both Nigerians and the international community.

It is no news any longer that the entire nation was enveloped in massive apathy and tension soon after the elections, to the extent that few people thought the nation could be as stable as it is today. To cut the matter short, the 2007 elections were the worst that Nigerians ever saw, according to those who have seen it all over time.

I am worried because at the time the nation was witnessing that unprecedented uncertainty, we individually and severally called for calm in view of the new posture the nation's judiciary was taking as the final arbiter and impartial umpire in any misunderstanding or dispute amongst individuals, groups or government levels and organs.

The belief was that even if most of those polls that were certified as fundamentally flawed would not be overturned by the courts, a few others would. By implication, that would not only pacify the aggrieved polity but also instil some hope on the possibilities of having a future more guaranteed.

On the other hand, we thought, if those in control of state power would not respect our wishes through the polls, the judiciary would tell them one thing: they cannot always continue to ram their selfishness down the throats of innocent Nigerians. This was to a reasonable degree achieved through the various though few rulings that overturned the elections in some states of the federation.

There are basically two or three categories of judgements on election matters delivered by the judiciary in recent times. Category one is comprised of those judgements delivered by the election petition tribunals at lower levels which confirmed that such elections were either marked by irregularities or certain candidates were excluded on the ballot or, as was the case in Sokoto and Kebbi states, with some technicalities owing to the movement of aspirants from one political formation to the other.

In such judgements, a rerun was ordered which by and large put those who won in the rerun at an advantage because they would eventually spend more than four years as governors of their states.

The second category of judgment, which has equally and more seriously pacified the aggrieved polity, was that which instantly defined certain candidates believed to have won the elections in some constituencies like Lere federal constituency, Edo and recently Ondo states as winners and thus asked that they be sworn in as those duly elected.

No doubt, the judiciary especially at the level of the apex court has over time won the confidence of Nigerians as far as integrity is concerned. That has been the case with several other courts at the lower levels of the judiciary. This has been variously seen in the manner technicalities were sidelined and the substance in the cases were given the necessary prominence which led to dispensation of justice in tune with necessary aspirations.

I remember the warning given by Justice Idris Kutigi to those judicial officers. He was specific that emphasis must be placed on the real substance in any matter before them and less of technicalities. We thought that warning was well received until when judgments began to come and there was the preponderance of technicalities. It was easier for a good number of judges to rest their cases on the basis of technical flaws and not the strength of evidences adduced to prove matters of electoral fraud.

The onus of proof is one of the very backward attributes of the conventional contemporary western legal system which has more or less remained a dogma, thus reducing the essence of law as a mechanism for social engineering. That is not even the major tragedy that we face today.

Of course, there is always the dictatorship of the courts. Once they rule on any matter, we have to respect such judgement even if there is room for appeal. In matters where appeal is exhausted, any fundamental mistake in delivery of judgement is an infringement on the fundamental rights and privileges of not only those who are before the court but also the entire citizenry, because there is miscarriage of justice. Injustice done to one is certainly injustice done to all.

As it is today, the Court of Appeal in Nigeria is under public scrutiny. The more they continue to take doubtful stance in the name of technicalities, the more they erode the sanctity of the respectable courts. One thing that will continue to remain cogent is that, at a point in history, that level of the judiciary was managed with reckless abandon. History books will record that level of the judiciary with great suspicion especially when placed against the immediate history of the Court of Appeal.

I grew up to know the court under Justice Mamman Nasir. It had tremendous respect of the populace. It was a bastion of justice and fairness. Nigerians never suspected either the president of the court nor any of its justices in the dispensation of justice.

Equally was the case during the tenure of Justice Mustapha Akanbi. The court retained high integrity and Nigerians respected it and all its justices. Every judgement that came was received in good faith. It is unfortunate that since the reign of Justice Umaru Abdullahi began, the integrity of the court and a host of its justices has taken a downward turn. Nigerians are crying loud and in numbers.

Fingers are pointed and there is suspicion on the strength of the characters of several justices. This reality looms in the horizon, to the extent that most Nigerians are apathetic about the capacity of that level of the judiciary to dispense justice without fear or favour. As a student, I also believed in that common saying that there is no smoke without fire. All the accusations cannot be completely mere figments of the imagination.

It is a tragedy that adults are afraid of light. While Nigerians are not expecting the courts to deliver judgements necessarily in tandem with the aspirations of the chanting public, there were some matters that the nation believed sincerely were massively compromised in the desire to maintain the status quo. This was corroborated by several respectable legal luminaries. The case of Senator David Mark is one in point.

I hope Justice Umaru Abdullahi and his colleagues are listening to popular opinion and ratings by Nigerians. There is a growing stigmatisation facing that level of the judiciary. Nigerians are asking questions on the brand of justice that seem to be emerging from the nation's second highest judicial institution.

It is not late for the nation to again repose its confidence on that level if drastic changes are to be witnessed in the manner popular and even unpopular cases before it are handled. It will truly be a tragedy if the situation goes the way it has in recent times. Both the judiciary and the nation have everything to lose. The task of upholding the rule of law is dialectical. It is for the operators of the law to be upright and dispense it without fear or favour, while our role as citizens is to abide by and respect such judgements.

It is only when that is achieved that the followership would subordinate itself to every decision of the courts. That is when democracy becomes effective and factual - when every citizen, no matter his standing in the society, is placed equally before the law. We urge the judiciary, especially the Court of Appeal, to help the nation rest the agitations following what happened in 2007. Judgements could go either way but, surely, they must be as convincing to the polity as they are to the judicial officers.