Will Judiciary Wage Demands Paralyse Nigeria’s Courts This Month? A JUSUN Strike Update
Right now, Nigeria’s judiciary is facing a serious disruption. On June 2, 2025, the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria—JUSUN for short—launched an indefinite nationwide strike. This action has effectively brought most court activities to a halt across the country. The strike is not a sudden flare-up but the result of a buildup of unresolved wage and welfare demands that have lingered for months.
At the heart of this strike are three major grievances: the payment of five months’ wage arrears tied to a previous salary award, the full implementation of the ₦70,000 national minimum wage for judicial staff, and a significant salary increase under the Consolidated Judiciary Salary Structure (CONJUSS), ranging between 25% to 35%. These demands reflect years of underpayment and unfulfilled promises.
This situation raises a pressing question: Will these wage demands and the ongoing strike paralyse Nigeria’s courts this month, and for how long? The judiciary is a cornerstone of any functioning democracy. When it stops working, justice stalls, and the ripple effects extend far beyond the courtroom—impacting businesses, individuals, and society’s trust in law and order.
In this article, we will dissect the origins of the strike, the current situation across Nigeria’s courts, government responses, and the real implications for justice delivery. We will also look at past strikes to understand potential outcomes and what the future may hold for Nigeria’s judiciary this month.
Background: The Genesis of the Strike
To truly understand the gravity of the current JUSUN strike, it is important to step back and look at how we got here. This is not an isolated event; it is part of a series of unresolved issues that have been simmering for years within Nigeria’s judicial workforce.
Judiciary workers have long faced challenges related to pay and welfare. The Consolidated Judiciary Salary Structure (CONJUSS), designed to standardize and improve the remuneration of judicial staff, was introduced with the promise of better pay and benefits. However, implementation has been slow and inconsistent, often hindered by bureaucratic delays and budgetary constraints.
In 2024, JUSUN had already initiated strikes across various states to press for full payment of their wage arrears and the implementation of the new minimum wage. Some states, like Abia, reached agreements with their governments to settle these demands, and strikes were suspended. Unfortunately, at the federal level, the situation remained unresolved. Promises made during previous negotiations failed to translate into concrete action or payments.
This recurring failure to meet salary obligations has bred frustration and mistrust among judiciary workers. The recent indefinite strike is a direct result of these lingering grievances. JUSUN’s demands are clear and centered around financial justice: they want five months of unpaid arrears cleared, the national minimum wage fully applied, and an adjustment reflecting the 25-35% salary increase under CONJUSS.
Without these, the union has declared it will maintain its industrial action until the federal government takes concrete steps. This reflects a breaking point for judiciary workers who have felt marginalized and undervalued for too long.
Understanding this background is key to appreciating why the strike is so widespread and why it has the potential to disrupt Nigeria’s entire judicial system this month.
Current Status of the Strike
As of early June 2025, the JUSUN strike has taken a firm grip across Nigeria’s judiciary landscape. Courts at various levels—state high courts, magistrate courts, and many federal courts—have ceased operations, with staff walking out or being locked out. This has effectively put a stop to hearing of cases, issuance of rulings, and all routine court functions.
The impact is nationwide. From Lagos to Kaduna, Enugu to Port Harcourt, courts are deserted. Litigants, lawyers, and court staff are left in limbo, waiting for a resolution that remains uncertain. The strike has led to the postponement of thousands of cases, creating a growing backlog that could take months or years to clear once normal activities resume.
Interestingly, not all parts of the judiciary are on strike. The Supreme Court, the National Judicial Council (NJC), and some federal courts have opted out of the industrial action. This is largely due to direct intervention by the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, who has been actively mediating between the government and JUSUN.
The Chief Justice’s involvement led to assurances that certain critical courts remain operational to ensure that constitutional matters and urgent cases can still be addressed. This partial exemption, however, does not fully alleviate the widespread paralysis across most other courts.
This fragmented situation means that while some judicial functions continue at the highest level, the majority of Nigerians have no access to routine legal processes. For businesses awaiting contract enforcement, families involved in custody or inheritance cases, and many others, the strike represents a severe disruption.
The atmosphere is tense. Judiciary workers remain firm on their demands, and there is little indication that the government has released funds or concrete plans to meet these wage arrears and salary adjustments. The strike’s indefinite nature signals a readiness to sustain this disruption until their grievances are addressed.
This snapshot of the current status reveals a judiciary at a crossroads—caught between a workforce demanding fair treatment and a government struggling to meet fiscal commitments.
Government’s Response and Interventions
The Nigerian government has not remained passive in the face of the judiciary strike. Recognizing the severe implications of a crippled court system, key government figures have stepped in to mediate and negotiate with JUSUN in hopes of resolving the standoff swiftly.
One of the most prominent interventions has come from the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun. Her direct involvement has been critical in preventing a total shutdown of all courts. Through her mediation, certain federal courts—including the Supreme Court and the National Judicial Council—have been exempted from the strike to maintain continuity in handling urgent and constitutional matters. Justice Kekere-Ekun has been in active dialogue with union leaders and government officials, emphasizing the need to protect the judiciary’s functionality even amidst industrial action.
Parallel to this, the Minister of Labour and Employment has taken up a conciliatory role. The Ministry has facilitated meetings aimed at bringing the disputing parties together to hammer out a workable solution. These discussions have revolved around the union’s core demands: the release of outstanding arrears for five months, implementation of the ₦70,000 minimum wage for judiciary staff, and the approved salary adjustments under the CONJUSS.
Despite these efforts, the government faces significant fiscal constraints. Nigeria’s economy is currently grappling with multiple pressures, including fluctuating oil revenues and budgetary deficits. This economic context complicates immediate cash disbursement to meet the wage arrears, which has been a sticking point in negotiations. Officials have assured that dialogue remains open and that the government prioritizes resolving the issue, but concrete timelines and budget allocations remain unclear.
State governments have shown varied responses. Some states, like Abia and Enugu, have negotiated partial settlements with their local judiciary workers, temporarily suspending strikes. Others have yet to reach agreements, contributing to the nationwide scale of disruption.
Ultimately, while the government is engaged in dialogue and some piecemeal efforts to ease the crisis, the lack of immediate financial solutions prolongs the uncertainty. The ongoing stalemate poses a risk of an extended paralysis of Nigeria’s courts if both sides fail to find common ground.
Implications of the Strike on Nigeria’s Justice System
The JUSUN strike is more than just a labor dispute. Its effects ripple deeply through Nigeria’s legal and societal fabric, threatening the very foundations of justice delivery in the country. Understanding these implications is crucial to appreciating the urgency of resolving the conflict.
First, the immediate consequence is the massive backlog of cases. With courts shut down across many states, hearings and trials are postponed indefinitely. This backlog will grow with each passing day of the strike, potentially overwhelming the judiciary when normal operations resume. Delays in court rulings stall business contracts, property disputes, family law matters, and criminal justice processes. This stagnation can exacerbate tensions, increase litigants’ frustration, and reduce confidence in the legal system.
Second, the strike undermines access to justice for the average Nigerian. Many citizens depend on the courts to resolve disputes, secure property rights, and protect their freedoms. When courts are inaccessible, vulnerable populations suffer disproportionately. This can lead to increased lawlessness or extra-judicial measures as people seek alternative means to settle conflicts.
Third, the judiciary’s reputation risks significant damage. A court system perceived as dysfunctional or unresponsive damages public trust in the rule of law. This erosion of trust has broader implications for governance, social cohesion, and Nigeria’s image internationally. Foreign investors and partners often view an effective judiciary as a marker of stability; prolonged disruptions may deter investments and complicate diplomatic relations.
Finally, the strike creates internal challenges within the judiciary itself. Prolonged industrial action can deepen divisions between judicial officers and staff, weaken morale, and affect overall productivity. The strain on the system may also complicate future reforms aimed at improving judicial efficiency and independence.
In sum, the implications of the JUSUN strike go well beyond immediate wage disputes. They threaten the very effectiveness, credibility, and accessibility of Nigeria’s justice system, making swift resolution critical.
Historical Precedents: Learning from Past Judiciary Strikes
Looking back at Nigeria’s history of judiciary strikes provides valuable insight into the potential trajectory of the current crisis. Past strikes have generally followed a pattern of initial disruption, government negotiation, partial settlements, and eventual resumption of court activities—though not without lingering effects.
For instance, the 2023 nationwide judiciary strike lasted for nearly three weeks, during which courts were largely non-functional. This strike ended after government intervention led to the release of some salary arrears and a commitment to reviewing salary structures. However, these partial measures only temporarily calmed tensions. Many underlying grievances remained unaddressed, sowing the seeds for the current strike.
Similarly, smaller strikes in various states over the last five years have resulted in ad hoc payments and sporadic improvements but lacked systemic reforms. These fragmented responses have failed to resolve the root causes of salary dissatisfaction and welfare neglect.
From these precedents, it is clear that strikes typically end when the government negotiates tangible financial concessions and judiciary staff regain confidence that their welfare is being prioritized. However, the lack of a comprehensive, nationwide salary and welfare reform continues to make the system vulnerable to recurring disruptions.
In light of these patterns, the current JUSUN strike could either resolve quickly with government intervention or become protracted if the underlying issues are not addressed holistically. The stakes are high given the judiciary’s central role in governance and public order.
What Lies Ahead: Possible Outcomes and Solutions
As the strike extends into June 2025, the question remains: Will Nigeria’s courts remain paralysed, or can a resolution be reached that safeguards justice delivery while addressing legitimate wage concerns?
One possible outcome is a swift resolution through intensified negotiations, with the government releasing at least part of the wage arrears and committing to implement the national minimum wage and CONJUSS adjustments. This would allow courts to reopen, reducing backlogs and restoring public confidence. Such a solution would require strong political will, transparent budgeting, and perhaps international support or loans to meet short-term fiscal gaps.
Alternatively, the strike could drag on if negotiations stall or if fiscal constraints limit the government’s ability to pay. Prolonged paralysis would exacerbate case backlogs, increase legal uncertainty, and deepen public frustration. This scenario risks destabilizing legal processes and may necessitate emergency interventions from the judiciary leadership or national government.
To prevent such an outcome, structural reforms are essential. These could include establishing an independent judiciary wage commission to review salaries transparently and regularly, instituting automated payment systems to avoid arrears, and improving budgetary allocations for judicial operations. Strengthening the dialogue framework between judiciary staff and government would also help preempt future crises.
In the immediate term, the Chief Justice’s continued mediation remains critical. Her ability to facilitate compromise and maintain some court operations highlights the importance of leadership in navigating this crisis.
In conclusion, the coming weeks will be pivotal. The judiciary’s functionality depends on the successful balancing of legitimate staff welfare demands with Nigeria’s economic realities. The outcome will not only affect courts but also Nigeria’s broader governance, economic stability, and social trust.
For Nigeria, addressing JUSUN’s legitimate demands is not merely about paying salaries—it is about reinforcing the foundation of justice and democracy. The government’s actions in the coming weeks will speak volumes about its dedication to these principles.
As the nation watches, the question remains: Will the judiciary wage demands paralyse Nigeria’s courts this month, or will a solution be found to keep the wheels of justice turning? The answer lies in the willingness of all parties to negotiate in good faith and prioritize the greater good.
This detailed, up-to-date examination of the JUSUN strike and its implications provides a clear, factual understanding of the challenges facing Nigeria’s judiciary today and the critical importance of resolving these disputes promptly.
