The Chief Justice's Charge to Bench and Bar: AI Authorities, Public Criticism and Forum Shopping
At the opening of the National Industrial Court's 2026/2027 legal year, the Chief Justice of Nigeria is reported to have warned lawyers to verify AI-generated authorities, to criticise judgments without attacking judges, and to avoid forum shopping. It is an address, not a judgment or a practice direction. A look at what was said and what it does and does not change.
On Wednesday, 7 October 2026, the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, used the opening of the National Industrial Court's 2026/2027 legal year to speak to judges and lawyers about how they should conduct themselves. As reported, she warned that artificial intelligence tools can produce authorities that look genuine but do not exist, that the right to criticise judgments does not cover personal attacks on judges, and that lawyers must resist forum shopping. She also told judges who may sit on election petition tribunals that their conduct will be closely scrutinised. This article sets out what was reported and is careful about what a speech like this does and does not change in law.
What happened?
The Chief Justice spoke in Abuja at a special court session marking the start of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria's (NICN) 2026/2027 legal year, held together with the commissioning of the court's new headquarters building. TheNigeriaLawyer, Platform Times, ThisDay, Blueprint and The Sun all report the address. I have not seen the full text, so what follows rests on those press accounts. Where only one outlet reports a point, I say so.
What the Chief Justice said
1. Artificial intelligence and fake authorities. Platform Times reports that she warned that AI systems can produce answers that look authoritative, with names of parties, citations, quotations and even a convincing account of a decision, none of which may be real. She is reported to have said: "That does not make the authority genuine." On the same report, a non-existent case, a wrongly stated decision or a misattributed quotation has no place in court processes, and lawyers should verify AI-generated legal material rigorously before relying on it. I found this point in only one outlet.
2. Criticism is allowed; personal attacks and pressure are not. She reportedly said lawyers may criticise a judgment or a judicial process, but that this right does not extend to personal attacks on judges, deliberate misrepresentation of proceedings, or attempts to put pressure on a court through public opinion. For genuine concerns about a judge's conduct, she pointed to the institutional channels that already exist.
3. Forum shopping and overlapping cases. She warned counsel against pursuing proceedings in different courts or divisions in the hope of a more favourable outcome, saying this can produce conflicting orders and expose the judiciary to embarrassment. TheNigeriaLawyer quotes her as saying "The proper forum is determined by law", not by the chance of success before a particular judge or court.
4. Judges, election petitions and conduct. She noted that some NICN judges may, under the applicable constitutional and legal framework, be called to serve on election petition tribunals. That work, she said, calls for even greater impartiality, restraint and detachment, and judges should ensure that nothing in their associations or public engagements creates a reasonable perception of political alignment. She also reminded judges that how they treat parties, lawyers and court staff, and how they explain their decisions, matters to public trust as much as outcomes. The reports link these remarks to the approach of the next election season. This article takes no position on any political matter.
Other points at the session
The NICN President, Justice Benedict Kanyip, said the court disposed of 2,236 cases across its divisions in the past 12 months, which he said significantly cut its historical backlog. He also raised concern that litigants and lawyers make little use of the court's Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms. According to TheNigeriaLawyer, only 31 cases were referred to ADR in the year: 11 were resolved, seven were at an advanced stage, and 13 were unsettled and returned to the referring judges for litigation.
The Attorney-General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, represented by Tijani Gazali, SAN, said delay in employment disputes can have serious consequences for both workers and employers, and that technology must be matched by case management, personnel and professional cooperation.
What an address is, and what it is not
This section is general background, not drawn from the reports. A speech at a legal-year ceremony is not a judgment, a statute or a practice direction. It does not create a new rule and cannot by itself punish anyone. What it does is signal what the head of the judiciary expects from the Bench and the Bar. The underlying rules come from elsewhere. Courts have long treated abuse of court process, including duplicated proceedings on the same dispute, as something they can restrain, and lawyers are bound by professional rules and a duty not to mislead the court. If a lawyer cites a case that does not exist, the problem is not the tool that suggested it. The problem is that an unverified authority was put before a court.
Why it matters
For law students: check every authority at source, in a law report or the court's own record, before you cite it, however convincing a tool's answer looks. For lawyers: the choice of court should follow jurisdiction, not tactics, and criticism of a decision should stay on the decision. For the public: the address draws a line between criticism of judgments, which was affirmed, and personal attacks or pressure, which the Chief Justice said are not part of that right. Where that line falls in a particular case is for the institutions that apply the rules, and the reports describe no new sanction or procedure.
Limits and open questions
I have not seen the full address. The AI-authorities point comes from one outlet. The reports I read do not mention any new rule, practice direction or disciplinary step, and I did not find a response from the Nigerian Bar Association. The NICN case figures are as stated by its President and I have not checked them independently.
Key takeaway
The message was about verification, restraint and the proper forum. It is guidance on conduct, not new law. The practical lesson for every lawyer and student is to check what you cite, argue the decision rather than the judge, and file in the court the law assigns.
Sources
TheNigeriaLawyer, "The Right To Criticise Does Not Extend To Personal Attacks On Judges": CJN Warns Lawyers Against Misrepresenting Proceedings, 7 October 2026: https://thenigerialawyer.com/the-right-to-criticise-does-not-extend-to-personal-attacks-on-judges-cjn-warns-lawyers-against-misrepresenting-proceedings/
Platform Times, CJN Raises Fresh Alarm: AI Now Generating Fake Court Cases, 7 October 2026: https://platformtimes.com.ng/cjn-raises-fresh-alarm-ai-now-generating-fake-court-cases/
ThisDay, 2027: CJN Tasks Judges on Impartiality, Detachment, Says Conduct Under Close Scrutiny, 8 October 2026: https://www.thisdaylive.com/2026/10/08/2027-cjn-tasks-judges-on-impartiality-detachment-says-conduct-under-close-scrutiny/
Blueprint, 2027 elections: We'll closely watch your conduct, CJN tells Nigerian judges: https://blueprint.ng/2027-elections-well-closely-watch-your-conduct-cjn-tells-nigerian-judges/
The Sun, 2027: CJN warns judges against bias, lawyers against forum shopping: https://thesun.ng/2027-cjn-warns-judges-against-bias-lawyers-against-forum-shopping/
Note: the full text of the address was not seen. This article is based on press reports and contains no verified case citations.
This article is written for educational purposes as part of my legal studies. It reflects my own reading of the law and does not constitute legal advice.