The Centre for Health Ethics and Law Development (CHELD), with the support of International IDEA, convened a National dialogue as part of its broader research and stakeholder engagement on juvenile justice reform in Nigeria. The dialogue was prompted by the 2024 prosecution of 119 children before the Federal High Court an incident that generated nationwide concern and underscored persistent structural weaknesses in the administration of juvenile justice, including failures in diversion, child-friendly procedures, and inter-agency coordination.
Drawing from the institutional analysis and stakeholder mapping done by CHELD, the dialogue brought together key actors across the justice and child-protection ecosystem. Participants included representatives of the Federal Ministry of Justice, the Nigerian Police Force, the Nigerian Correctional Service, the judiciary, relevant social welfare authorities, civil society organisations, and development partners i.e UNICEF and International IDEA. Stakeholders identified significant procedural lapses beginning from arrest and investigation. Children were often processed through adult criminal procedures, with insufficient attention paid to age determination, parental notification, or referral to social welfare authorities. Participants further noted that the use of serious criminal classifications enabled children to be charged before adult courts, thereby bypassing family courts and child-friendly safeguards that should ordinarily apply. Bail conditions imposed on the children were widely viewed as excessive and unrealistic, effectively amounting to punishment rather than a mechanism to secure attendance at trial.
The dialogue also underscored the harmful consequences of prolonged pre-trial detention, including the continued use of adult or unsuitable custodial facilities for children, delays in accessing legal representation, and the absence of structured psychosocial support. These shortcomings were compounded by broader institutional challenges, such as weak coordination between justice and welfare agencies, limited retention of trained juvenile justice personnel, inconsistent application of diversion protocols, and inadequate data systems for tracking children in conflict with the law.
In response, stakeholders proposed a range of immediate measures aimed at preventing further harm to children currently in contact with the justice system. These included stricter enforcement of diversion at the point of arrest for minor and non-violent offences, mandatory referral of serious or complex child cases to prosecutorial authorities before charges are filed, and urgent review of bail conditions imposed on minors to ensure they are proportionate and consistent with the best interests of the child. Participants emphasised the need for early recognition of child status at every stage of the process, adoption of a unified standard operating procedure for handling juvenile cases, protection of children’s identities through in-camera hearings and confidentiality safeguards, and provision of prompt psychosocial and medical support.
Looking beyond immediate interventions, the dialogue highlighted the need for sustained structural reform. Participants called for the need to amend the Constitution to clearly provide for the family court to trial children. They stressed the importance of expanding and properly resourcing family courts, child-appropriate remand and rehabilitation facilities, and non-custodial alternatives. Strengthening institutional capacity through targeted recruitment, training and retention of juvenile justice personnel was identified as essential, alongside the development of reliable data systems and age-verification processes linked to broader birth-registration efforts.
The dialogue further recognised that effective reform will depend on coordinated implementation. Stakeholders recommended the establishment of a multi-stakeholder mechanism to oversee adoption of standard procedures, legislative advocacy, pilot diversion programmes and inter-agency collaboration. Clear timelines, defined institutional responsibilities, and measurable indicators were identified as necessary to ensure accountability and track progress. Public communication strategies were also considered important, both to protect children from stigma and to build confidence in reform efforts.
CHELD reaffirmed its commitment to supporting the implementation of these recommendations through continued research, technical assistance, stakeholder coordination and monitoring. The Centre emphasised the importance of inclusive engagement that incorporates the perspectives of children, families and communities alongside those of government institutions and professional bodies. Participants concluded that the trial of the 119 children exposed systemic weaknesses that require urgent corrective action and long-term reform. If implemented, the measures identified through the dialogue would significantly strengthen Nigeria’s juvenile justice system by reducing reliance on detention and prioritising rehabilitation, reintegration and the protection of children’s rights.