The President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Afam Osigwe, has expressed concern over what he described as the increasing imposition of stringent bail conditions by courts and law enforcement agencies, arguing that such requirements could undermine the constitutional purpose of bail.
In a statement on Thursday titled “Bail Conditions Should Not Undermine the Essence of Bail,” Osigwe said there had been a growing trend in the criminal justice system where bail conditions imposed by courts and agencies such as the Nigeria Police Force, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) were becoming difficult for many defendants to meet.
According to him, requirements such as producing senior civil servants as sureties or providing landed properties of substantial value often leave accused persons in detention despite being granted bail.
“We have observed with growing concern a disturbing trend in the administration of criminal justice in Nigeria, where courts and law enforcement agencies increasingly impose bail conditions that are excessive, impractical, and difficult to satisfy,” he said.
“The frequent insistence on sureties who are senior civil servants of specified grade levels, coupled with demands for landed properties of extraordinary value, has in many cases transformed bail from a mechanism for securing attendance at trial into a tool of pretrial detention.”
Osigwe stated that bail remains a constitutional safeguard intended to ensure an accused person’s attendance in court while preserving personal liberty pending the determination of a case.
He argued that the law requires bail conditions to be reasonable and capable of being fulfilled, noting that the Supreme Court had previously held that the objective of bail pending trial is to grant pre-trial freedom to an accused person whose appearance in court can be secured through appropriate conditions.
“Bail is neither a punishment nor a mechanism for imposing pre-trial incarceration by indirect means,” he said.
The NBA president also expressed concern over the continued use of senior public servants as mandatory sureties in some cases, particularly those on Grade Levels 16 and 17.
According to him, appellate courts have criticised such requirements, citing judicial decisions that questioned both their practicality and their consistency with public service regulations.
“Of particular concern is the continued insistence in some cases on sureties who must be senior civil servants, often on Grade Levels 16 or 17, and who must own properties worth hundreds of millions of naira,” he said.
Osigwe further referenced provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015, which he said require that bail conditions should not be excessive.
He maintained that judicial discretion in granting bail should be exercised in a manner that aligns with constitutional guarantees and the presumption of innocence.
“We therefore restate that bail conditions must be tailored solely to ensure attendance at trial. They must never serve as instruments of punishment prior to conviction,” he said.
The NBA president also questioned the practice of limiting acceptable sureties to a particular class of citizens, arguing that there was no evidence that senior civil servants were inherently more reliable than other law-abiding Nigerians.
“There is no evidence that civil servants are inherently more reliable as sureties than other law-abiding citizens. Such requirements unduly narrow the pool of eligible sureties and create artificial barriers to the enjoyment of a constitutional right,” he stated.
Osigwe called on courts to be guided by constitutional provisions, the ACJA, and relevant judicial authorities when considering bail applications.
He urged judicial officers to ensure that bail conditions remain fair, reasonable, proportionate and attainable, while also safeguarding the constitutional presumption of innocence.
“As guardians of the rule of law, we must collectively ensure that the constitutional right to bail remains meaningful and effective,” he said.
“Bail should not become a privilege reserved only for those with extraordinary means or connections. It must remain what the law intended it to be — a mechanism for securing attendance at trial while preserving the liberty and dignity of persons who have not been convicted of any offence.”
