Judicial Well-Being: Its Importance and Impact on the Administration of Justice

By Nsikak Effiong

Introduction

Judges play an outsized role in the interpretation of binding rules and regulations and advancing the course of justice. They are called upon to administer justice impartially and without fear or bias. Placed in this unenviable position and saddled with these demands, their actions, utterances, or conduct are met with severe scrutiny and countless reviews by the media and public at large. As they are the central thread holding together the machinery of justice and the rule of law, there is no gainsaying that there should be an increased focus on their well-being, whether emotionally, financially, or psychologically. The pressure mounted on the judiciary, especially in the current era of digital technology, where opinions are held and exchanged in real time, the challenges from autocratic or ‘democratic’ institutions, and increased workload which induces stress should be a wake-up call for the prioritisation of their needs, experiences, and coping mechanisms to mitigate or cushion their effect.

What is judicial well-being, and why is it so important?

It has been defined as advocating for “judges to have ample opportunity to care for their physical and mental health.”[1] It connotes the entire welfare of judges, whether physical, emotional, financial, or otherwise. It encompasses both personal and professional lives. It is the state of being comfortable, healthy, or happy. On March 4, 2025, the United Nations General Assembly voted to declare July 25 as the International Day for Judicial Well-being.[2] The resolution, led by the Pacific island nation of Nauru and co-sponsored by 70 countries, followed from the Nauru Declaration on Judicial Well-being.[3]

Prior to now, concerns about the state of affairs and well-being of judicial personnel, especially judges, were seen as taboo, which should not be brought up or discussed. According to Professor Terry Maroney of Vanderbilt University, a “persistent cultural script of judicial dispassion” and invulnerability has, for much of history, silenced any open conversation about the human dimension of judging.[4] The state of judicial well-being is inextricably linked to an efficient and effective administration of justice and the rule of law. It affects the integrity, impartiality, and speedy dispensation of justice. The seven principles of judicial well-being are as follows:

1. Judicial well-being is essential and must be recognised and supported.
2. Judicial stress is not a weakness and must not be stigmatised.
3. Judicial well-being is a responsibility of individual judges and judicial institutions.
4. Judicial well-being is supported by an ethical and inclusive judicial culture.
5. Promoting judicial well-being requires a combination of awareness-raising, prevention, and management activities.
6. Judicial well-being activities must suit the unique circumstances and requirements of national jurisdictions.
7. Judicial well-being is enhanced by human rights.

The world over, there are various instances of attacks on judges and magistrates,[5] increased workload load especially in developing countries where there are not enough judges to match the rising case load, inadequate financial compensation, and threatened safety.

The Nigerian Context

Nigeria is saturated with cases involving attempts to kidnap and actual kidnappings of judicial officers,[6] a shortage of manpower to handle the growing number of cases in the courts,[7] and the poor remuneration of judicial officers. There have been various reported deaths of judicial officers nationwide, which have evoked a clarion call for a holistic review of the conditions of service. While there is a growing discourse on the mental health status of judicial officers, which has garnered strength in the last decade, we are yet to see an open discourse in Nigeria by judicial officers on work-related stressors and the impact on their mental health. The office is considered so sacred and hallowed that a judicial officer who is still in active service talking about trauma from a case or work-related stress is considered taboo and may lead to open rebuke. The conservative nature of the profession has contributed to keeping judicial officers trapped and condemned to suffer in silence. Our adjudication system is one of the slowest in the world, and at the forefront of this cause is the insensitivity to the well-being of the judiciary. Nigeria is ranked 96 out of 142 countries globally when assessing the timeliness and effectiveness of the criminal adjudication system.[8] In assessing whether our justice system is free from corruption, we are ranked 114th out of 142 countries.[9]

Conclusion

Judicial well-being is integral to the integrity and proper administration of justice. Judicial officers are humans first before assuming the office or position they occupy, and as such, must be accorded attention and an avenue to vent their frustrations and work-induced stress. As the commentary on Principle 1 of the Nauru Declaration states: “Judicial well-being is essential for individual judges’ occupational health and sustainability, for court users’ experience in court, for the quality of justice, and ultimately for public confidence in the courts. As such, judicial well-being warrants attention and investment commensurate with other institutional priorities, such as access to justice, the upholding of judicial values, judicial training, and judicial efficiency.”[10] There is need to lay great emphasis on the well-being of judges which is crucial to a well-functioning judiciary. This in turn leads to stable democratic environment where executive overreach is curtailed and the rule of law reigns supreme.

Bibliography 

[1] (Judicialwellbeing.info) <https://judicialwellbeing.info/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Report-Proposal-for-Wellbeing-Declaration_2.pdf> accessed July 24, 2025.

[2] G.A. Res. 79/266, International Day for Judicial Well-being (Mar. 4, 2025).

[3] UN Office on Drugs and Crime, Nauru Declaration on Judicial Well-being (July 25, 2024) <https://judicialwellbeing.info/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Nauru-Declaration-on-Judicial-Well-being.pdf> accessed July 24, 2025.

[4] Terry A. Maroney, The Persistent Cultural Script of Judicial Dispassion, 99 calif. law. rev 629 (2011).

[5] Stone P, “US Judges Who Rule against Trump Are Being Barraged with Abuse and Threats, Experts Warn” The guardian (May 17, 2025) <https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/may/17/trump-judges-courts-threats> accessed July 24, 2025

[6] “Police Confirm Abduction of High Court Judge” (Premium Times Nigeria, June 22, 2025) <https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/top-news/802455-police-confirm-abduction-of-high-court-judge.html> accessed July 24, 2025

[7] News Agency of Nigeria, “One Judge Assigned 1,000 Cases; Nigerian Judges Overworked: Ex-Justice” (Peoples Gazette Nigeria, March 30, 2022) <https://gazettengr.com/one-judge-assigned-1000-cases-nigerian-judges-overworked-ex-justice/> accessed July 24, 2025

[8] “WJP Rule of Law Index” (Worldjusticeproject.org) <https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index/country/2024/Nigeria/Criminal%20Justice> accessed July 24, 2025

[9] Ibid

[10] UN Office on Drugs and Crime, Nauru Declaration on Judicial Well-being (July 25, 2024) <https://judicialwellbeing.info/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Nauru-Declaration-on-Judicial-Well-being.pdf> accessed July 24, 2025.