POWER OF THE CHIEF JUDGE TO TRANSFER CASE TO ANY DIVISION OF THE HIGH COURT
F.R.N. v. Lamido (2026) 12 NWLR (Pt. 2054) 351 at 386—388, H per Umar JSC:
‘In his contentions, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the prosecuting agency (EFCC) wrote a letter to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court requesting for a transfer of the case from Kano Judicial Division to Abuja Judicial Division for security reasons and that the application for transfer was approved. It should be established that the power of the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court to transfer a case from one territorial jurisdiction to another, particularly by reason of insecurity, is a critical aspect of judicial administration aimed at ensuring justice, public peace, and the integrity of judicial proceedings. This power is primarily derived from statutory provisions and is supported by judicial pronouncements. One of the most direct statutory provisions granting such power is section 98 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015 which provides thus: “The power of the Chief Judge of a High Court may, where it appears to him that the transfer of a case will promote the ends of justice or will be in the interest of the public peace, transfer any case from one court to another.”
This section explicitly states that the Chief Judge of a High Court may, where it appears that the transfer of a case will promote the ends of justice or will be in the interests of the public peace, transfer any case from one court to another. The phrase “interests of the public peace” is particularly relevant to situations involving insecurity. In circumstances where the prevailing security situation in a particular territorial jurisdiction might compromise the safety of parties, witnesses, judicial officers, or the general public, or might otherwise impede the fair and impartial conduct of a trial, the Chief-Judge can invoke this power. The ends of justice” also encompasses the need to ensure that trials are conducted in an environment free from intimidation and undue influence, which insecurity can engender. Underscoring the importance of security in a criminal trial, Section 93(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act becomes relevant, it provides that:
“A criminal charge shall be filled and tried in the decision where the alleged offence was committed unless it can be shown that it is convenient to do otherwise for security reasons”
It is important to note the limitation under subsection of section 98, which states that this power shall not be exercised where the prosecution has called witnesses, only imply that such transfers are generally intended for earlier stages of proceedings as it was in the instant case.’
