For accountability and integrity to be attained and maintained at the Court of Appeal, all Judges must read and sign rulings and judgments before they are released to parties by email. The decision must have the seal and signature of the Registrar of the Court of Appeal. The recent NSSF ruling where it is obvious that one Judge wrote and released the ruling without reference to the other two Judges underscores this premise. There are three other reasons why this requirement must be enforced.
First, before online Court, rulings and judgments were delivered in open Court, on Friday mornings and released to parties there and then. Often, the delivery would be by one Judge if the decision was unanimous. In case of a dissenting decision, all three, five or seven Judges would be present. In all cases, the decision read out and released bore the seal and signature of the Registrar of the Court of Appeal. The seal and signature were embossed and made respectively, only after certification and confirmation by the Registrar of the Court of Appeal that all Judges had signed the original decision(s) in the Court file. Accountability and integrity for the decision was thereby guaranteed.
Second, lethargy has creeped into the Court of Appeal. Judges are not present at the Court room. Many hear the cases from home and without the Court file. They conference on phone and decide on the basis of what they heard whether or not to allow the application or appeal. One is then tasked to write the decision. The tasked Judge then assigns the writing to his/her researcher. The researcher will determine the matter. I can tell you without any fear of contradiction that 50% of the decisions delivered by the Court of Appeal are not agreed upon but often the Judges uncomfortable with the decision look the other side to avoid unnecessary conflict.
Three, the doubled number of Judges of the Court of Appeal comes with its advantages and disadvantages. The disadvantages relate to collective responsibility and supervision for purposes of accountability and integrity. Ideally, incompetence, misbehavior and misconduct multiplies with the increased number of Judges. The only way to maintain and sustain accountability and integrity for decisions made is to adopt a protocol for ownership by individual Judges of the decisions. That protocol is there. Let the Chief Justice, the President of the Court of Appeal and the Registrar of the Court of Appeal enforce it.