Transforming LegalPractice: The Role of Technology and Digital Innovation in Nigeria’s Legal System

Abstract

This article examines the integration of technology into Nigeria’s legal system, analyzing its influence on practice, procedure, and access to justice. While the shift to digital platforms has improved efficiency in litigation, legal research, and document management, it has also exposed challenges relating to digital inequality, weak infrastructure, and regulatory uncertainty. The article investigates relevant statutory frameworks, judicial innovations, professional ethics, and legal education reforms. Through doctrinal and comparative analysis, it highlights gaps and proposes actionable reforms to ensure the Nigerian legal system can benefit from technology while preserving its core legal values.

Introduction

The digital transformation of legal systems globally is reshaping how justice is accessed and delivered. Nigeria, Africa’s largest democracy, is not exempt from this paradigm shift. The increasing use of digital tools such as e-filing systems, virtual hearings, automated research platforms, and data protection frameworks has altered traditional legal procedures, demanding adaptability from legal institutions, practitioners, and regulators.

Background: The historical development of Nigeria’s legal system reveals its deep entrenchment in manual, paper based methods inherited from the British colonial system. Legal filings, court proceedings, and case law reporting traditionally relied on physical documentation. However, since the late 2000s, technology adoption has gathered pace, driven by globalization, judicial backlog, and public demand for efficient legal services.

Key statutes and institutional frameworks have begun to evolve. The Evidence Act 2011, for instance, includes provisions for electronic evidence, thereby aligning Nigeria with international standards such as the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce. The Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015 provides cybersecurity safeguards critical to legal digitalization. Meanwhile, the National Judicial Council (NJC), Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC), and the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) have initiated reforms towards digital literacy and remote legal services.

Main Body

1. Statutory and Regulatory Foundations

Digital transformation within Nigeria’s legal system is underpinned by a suite of statutory and regulatory frameworks aimed at enabling, regulating, and securing digital legal processes. These legal instruments provide the foundation for integrating technology into evidence law, criminal procedure, cybersecurity, and data governance.

(a) Evidence Act 2011

One of the cornerstones of legal digitalization in Nigeria is Section 84 of the Evidence Act 2011, which governs the admissibility of electronically generated evidence. Subsection (2) of this provision stipulates that a certificate must accompany any electronic document tendered in evidence, confirming the reliability and proper functioning of the computer that produced it. This requirement ensures authenticity, integrity, and chain of custody, aligning Nigerian evidentiary standards with international best practices such as the Federal Rules of Evidence (USA) and the UNICTRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce. In the seminal case of Kubor v Dickson (2013) 4 NWLR (Pt 1345) 534, the Supreme Court was faced with determining whether electronic printouts of newspaper reports were admissible without the certificate required under Section 84(2). The Court held that strict compliance with the evidentiary certificate requirement was mandatory and that its absence rendered the electronically generated document inadmissible. Justice Kekere-Ekun emphasized that the purpose of the provision was to guard against manipulation or tampering with digital evidence, especially in an era where such data can be easily altered. This case set a precedent that has since guided both trial and appellate courts in scrutinizing digital evidence. It underlined the judicial insistence on procedural compliance and the evidential burden placed on parties seeking to rely on computer-generated documents.

(b) Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015

The Cybercrimes Act 2015 complements the Evidence Act by creating a substantive and procedural framework for managing cyber risks and protecting digital evidence. Section 15 of the Act specifically criminalizes the unauthorized modification or destruction of data, which is vital in upholding the forensic integrity of electronic evidence. Additionally, the Act provides for the preservation and retention of traffic data by service providers (Section 38), thereby creating a system of traceability and accountability. These provisions not only safeguard digital transactions and communications from tampering but also provide a legal basis for digital forensic investigations in civil and criminal matters. The Act has been instrumental in reinforcing judicial confidence in the admissibility and probative value of digital material. For example, in criminal prosecutions involving cyberstalking, identity theft, or financial fraud, digital trails preserved under the Act have proven crucial in establishing intent and culpability.

(c) Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015

While the ACJA is primarily procedural, it plays a pivotal role in facilitating digital innovation within Nigeria’s criminal justice system. Section 396(7) allows a newly assigned judge to continue a criminal trial from where the previous judge left off, provided that the evidence has been properly recorded. This provision has become an enabler of court automation and electronic transcription, since digital records can now be relied upon to ensure procedural continuity.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, this section enabled several courts to transition into remote and hybrid hearings, leveraging digital platforms such as Zoom and Microsoft Teams to conduct trials without violating the defendant’s constitutional right to fair hearing. This legal flexibility has also encouraged several state judiciaries, particularly in Lagos and Rivers States, to implement e-filing portals, online court scheduling, and digital cause lists, improving efficiency and reducing adjournments.

(d) Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023

The Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023 (NDPA) marks a significant evolution in the country’s data governance landscape, replacing the Nigeria Data Protection Regulation (NDPR) 2019 and aligning more closely with global instruments like the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). It establishes a comprehensive legal framework for the collection, processing, storage, and transfer of personal data, including that handled by legal professionals. The Act imposes duties on “data controllers” and “data processors”, roles that encompass lawyers, law firms, and court registries when handling clients’ or litigants’ personal data through digital systems. Key provisions include the requirement for lawful processing (Section 25), data security obligations (Section 30), and the reporting of data breaches (Section 33). For instance, a law firm using a cloud-based case management system must now ensure that the service provider complies with data protection standards, including encryption and secure access protocols. Legal practitioners are also required to obtain explicit consent before processing sensitive client data, which is especially relevant in litigation involving personal health records, financial data, or digital communications. The NDPA also established the Nigeria Data Protection Commission (NDPC), which has the power to investigate data breaches, impose administrative fines, and issue compliance directives. The legal community is expected to integrate data protection best practices into both litigation strategy and law office management, ushering in an era of privacy-aware legal practice.

2. Judicial Digitalization and Institutional Innovation

The evolution of Nigeria’s judicial system into the digital space marks a critical shift in legal administration, spurred by technological advances and the urgent demands of justice delivery in a rapidly changing world. The judiciary, through various institutional and procedural reforms, has progressively integrated digital tools into court operations. This transformation, although not without challenges, underscores a growing commitment to efficiency, accessibility, and transparency in legal processes.

(a) Remote Hearings

The move to remote court sessions represents a significant departure from traditional in-person hearings. A landmark development in this regard came in the case of Simeon Nwakaudu v President, FRN & Ors (FHC/ABJ/CS/462/2020), where the Federal High Court was called upon to determine whether virtual hearings violate the constitutional guarantee of a fair and public trial as provided in Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).The applicant argued that remote hearings infringed on the requirement for public judicial proceedings. However, the court held that so long as transparency and public access were preserved through open links or designated public streams, the digital format did not offend constitutional safeguards. This judgment validated the judiciary’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, where physical courtrooms became inaccessible.

Subsequent to this ruling, the National Judicial Council (NJC) issued policy guidelines allowing for remote hearings, encouraging courts to adopt video conferencing tools like Zoom and Skype for appropriate proceedings. This enabled courts across Nigeria to continue adjudicating matters, especially urgent applications, bail hearings, and interlocutory motions. Remote hearings have proven particularly effective in handling civil matters with minimal factual disputes, commercial litigation, and appellate work. They have significantly reduced the cost and logistical challenges of litigation, especially for parties and counsel located far from the court’s jurisdiction. However, in criminal trials that involve live testimony, examination of witnesses, or tendering of physical exhibits, their application remains limited due to concerns over witness credibility assessment and evidence verification.

(b) State-Level Initiatives

While federal efforts have laid a foundation for digital adoption, much of the progress in judicial digitalization has come from state-level initiatives. Lagos State, widely regarded as a leader in legal innovation, introduced Practice Direction No. 2 of 2020, which formalized procedures for electronic filing, service of processes, and remote hearings. This Practice Direction provided specific guidance on scheduling, the use of secure video conferencing platforms, and the admissibility of electronic evidence, thus creating a stable legal environment for virtual litigation. In Ogun State, similar reforms were implemented to facilitate digital case management and virtual court sittings. These initiatives allowed legal practitioners to file court documents online, attend hearings remotely, and track case progress through digital platforms—minimizing delays and manual bureaucracy. The Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court has also taken major steps towards modernization. The court launched an Electronic Case Management System (ECMS), which automates key litigation processes, including the registration of cases, document filing, scheduling of hearings, and issuance of rulings. This system improves transparency and speeds up judicial workflow, helping reduce the common issue of adjournments caused by administrative inefficiencies. These state-led reforms represent a decentralized but effective approach to digital transformation in the legal sector. They show how individual jurisdictions, recognizing the need for more efficient justice delivery, have leveraged legal authority and institutional capacity to lead reform from the ground up.

(c) Challenges

Despite commendable advancements, several systemic and practical barriers continue to undermine the widespread adoption of judicial digitalization. One pressing issue is the lack of uniform access to technology across the judiciary. Many magistrates and customary courts, particularly in rural and underserved areas, operate without functional internet access or basic computing facilities. This digital divide threatens to deepen inequality in access to justice, especially for litigants in marginalized communities. Furthermore, the absence of consistent digital literacy among judicial personnel remains a stumbling block. While some judges and court staff have adjusted to using e-platforms, many still struggle with the basic technical know-how required to manage virtual courtrooms, digital evidence, and electronic filings. Although the National Judicial Institute (NJI) organizes training programs, these are irregular and not universally attended. There is also institutional inertia in some quarters, rooted in procedural conservatism and skepticism about the reliability of digital systems. Some stakeholders fear that remote hearings may compromise the integrity of oral testimony, allow for coaching of witnesses off-camera, or present authentication issues regarding electronic exhibits. Such concerns, while valid, can be mitigated through regulatory safeguards and better technological design.

Additionally, many courts operate under outdated procedural rules that do not accommodate modern digital practices. For instance, the High Court Civil Procedure Rules and the Criminal Procedure Act still emphasize physical appearances and paper-based processes. Until these frameworks are reviewed and updated, courts may continue to face procedural uncertainties when dealing with electronically administered matters. Lastly, data privacy and cyber-security risks pose substantial challenges. As courts increasingly depend on digital communication and storage, the threat of data breaches and unauthorized access becomes more pronounced. The enactment of the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023—which replaces the former NDPR—is a step in the right direction. It provides a legal framework for safeguarding personal data processed by the judiciary, including the data of litigants, witnesses, and legal practitioners. However, enforcement mechanisms and internal compliance systems within the court structure remain underdeveloped.

3. Legal Research and Document Automation

The evolution of digital tools has significantly improved the efficiency and accuracy of legal research and documentation in Nigeria. These innovations have reduced the burden of manual processes and introduced a more structured approach to accessing and applying legal information.

(a) Digital Legal Research Platforms

The use of digital databases has become essential in the modern Nigerian legal landscape. Platforms such as LawPavilion, Legalpedia, and Primsol provide access to a wide array of legal materials, including judicial decisions, statutory provisions, procedural rules, and academic commentaries. These platforms enable lawyers to quickly identify binding precedents, extract relevant principles, and stay updated on legislative developments. These tools support the practical application of the doctrine of stare decisis, which requires lower courts to follow decisions of superior courts. For instance, if a lawyer needs to cite the principle of law in Adegoke Motors Ltd v Adesanya (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt 109) 250, digital platforms provide immediate access to the case and similar authorities. Moreover, in line with Section 259 of the Evidence Act 2011, which defines a “document” to include electronic records, the legal profession can now tender digitally sourced documents, such as e-judgments or statute extracts, in court proceedings. This facilitates the admissibility of such materials where they meet the criteria set out in Section 84 of the same Act, which deals specifically with the admissibility of computer-generated documents. The use of certified digital sources from platforms like Law Pavilion makes compliance with these requirements more straightforward.

(b) Document Drafting and Automation

Beyond legal research, automation tools are increasingly being used to support the drafting of legal documents. While fully AI-driven legal technology is not yet widespread in Nigeria, there are emerging local tools that assist lawyers in performing basic drafting tasks with greater efficiency. An example is Law Pavilion’s TIMI, a digital assistant designed to help lawyers create arguments, search relevant authorities, and generate legal opinions. Another tool, BriefPro, assists with document structuring by offering templates for briefs, affidavits, motions, and other legal filings. These tools enhance consistency, especially in large law firms where standardization across multiple lawyers is important.

These automated tools are especially helpful in transactional work, such as drafting lease agreements or employment contracts. They can integrate relevant clauses based on governing laws, such as the Labor Act, CAMA 2020, or tax provisions under the Finance Act 2021. While these tools improve speed and reduce the risk of clerical error, it is essential for lawyers to review and tailor generated content to meet the specific needs of the client and ensure legal soundness. However, the outputs of these tools must still meet the evidentiary standards under Nigerian law. For instance, if a contract generated by automation is to be used in litigation, it must comply with the authenticity requirements under Section 84 of the Evidence Act 2011, which mandates a certification of the computer system’s reliability and proper functioning.

(c) Practical Challenges and Observations

Despite their growing relevance, access to digital research and drafting tools is still uneven. Many lawyers, especially those practicing in rural or underserved regions, may lack the resources to subscribe to premium services or the infrastructure necessary for digital access. This digital divide raises concerns about fairness and uniform development in legal practice. Additionally, while automation tools provide useful frameworks, they are not substitutes for professional legal judgment. For example, automated drafting tools may not adequately reflect the nuances of a case that turns on equitable relief or a novel constitutional issue, which requires human analysis and discretion. Institutions such as the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and Council of Legal Education (CLE) have a critical role to play in bridging the digital skills gap through training, resource-sharing, and policy advocacy that promotes equitable access to legal technology.

4. Digital Ethics and Regulatory Gaps

The digitalization of legal practice has introduced new ethical considerations that the existing legal framework in Nigeria has yet to fully address. While the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners (RPC) 2007 provide general obligations concerning competence and confidentiality, they are largely silent on the specific ethical challenges posed by digital technologies. Rule 19 of the RPC mandates lawyers to maintain the confidentiality of all client communications. However, the Rule does not explicitly account for modern data handling practices, such as cloud storage, remote access, or the potential consequences of a cybersecurity breach. For example, if a law firm stores confidential client documents on a third-party cloud server and that server is hacked, there is no clear guideline in the RPC on how the breach should be disclosed or addressed.

The emergence of the Nigerian Data Protection Act 2023, which established the Nigerian Data Protection Commission (NDPC), marks a significant step toward addressing some of these concerns. The Act imposes obligations on data controllers and processors—including law firms—to ensure the integrity, confidentiality, and lawful processing of personal data. The NDPC, in collaboration with the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), is expected to develop a Digital Code of Ethics tailored to legal professionals. This would align legal practice with international data governance norms, such as those found under the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

Comparative jurisdictions provide useful examples. In the United Kingdom, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) mandates that law firms using AI and other digital tools must evaluate their systems for transparency, accountability, and bias. This ensures that legal technologies do not compromise fairness or undermine public confidence in the justice system. Nigeria’s RPC must be similarly revised to accommodate digital responsibilities, including ethical use of legal software, data protection, and virtual communication standards.

5. Digital Inclusion and Access to Justice

(a) The Digital Divide and Constitutional Rights

A key challenge to the digital transformation of legal services in Nigeria is the significant disparity in access to digital infrastructure. According to estimates by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), only about 36% of Nigerians have regular internet access, with even lower rates in rural communities. This lack of connectivity inhibits access to virtual courtrooms, online legal resources, and e-filing platforms. The implication is a direct threat to the constitutional right to fair hearing, enshrined in Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). If a litigant cannot access digital platforms due to poor connectivity, it creates an unequal playing field and undermines the principle of audi alteram partem (hear the other side).

(b) Funding and Institutional Support

One of the key barriers to these inclusive solutions is inadequate funding. The Judiciary Budget Committee, in collaboration with the National Judicial Council (NJC), must prioritise allocations for ICT development within the judicial system. Simultaneously, the Federal Ministry of Communications, Innovation and Digital Economy can support these efforts by improving rural broadband penetration and providing technical infrastructure.

Strategic partnerships between government agencies, development partners, and professional bodies such as the NBA could also facilitate the rollout of inclusive digital legal services across Nigeria.

6. Legal Education and the Future Lawyer

(a) Curriculum Reform in Legal Training

The transformation of legal services requires a corresponding evolution in legal education. At present, the Nigerian Law School and many university law faculties continue to focus heavily on analogue methods of legal instruction. The curriculum does not sufficiently incorporate legal informatics, technology law, AI ethics, or digital litigation skills—despite the growing demand for such knowledge in legal practice.

In Nigeria, the Council of Legal Education (CLE) must take proactive steps to introduce digital law subjects as compulsory modules in both undergraduate and vocational legal training programmes. Topics such as digital evidence, cyber law, online dispute resolution, and legal analytics should be integral parts of the training of future lawyers.

(b) Continuing Legal Education (CLE) for Practicing Lawyers

While some digital upskilling is currently offered through the Nigerian Bar Association Institute of Continuing Legal Education (NBA-ICLE), these programs are limited in scope and participation. To prepare lawyers for the realities of modern legal practice, Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) should incorporate compulsory training on digital legal skills. This should include modules on electronic evidence management, cybersecurity for lawyers, legal technology ethics, and remote advocacy.

Conclusion

The digital transformation of Nigeria’s legal system is a multifaceted endeavor, marked by incremental progress yet shadowed by systemic constraints. The country’s legal and regulatory instruments provide a legal scaffold for digital innovation, but practical application often lags behind due to infrastructural gaps, institutional inertia, and socio-economic disparities. A comparative lens reveals both opportunities and cautionary parallels from other jurisdictions, offering useful insights into Nigeria’s ongoing journey. Nigeria’s statutory and regulatory instruments demonstrate growing legislative intent to accommodate technological realities. The Evidence Act 2011 is particularly significant, as Section 84 makes provision for the admissibility of computer-generated evidence, provided conditions regarding authenticity and proper certification are met. This innovation became central in Kubor v Dickson (2013) 4 NWLR (Pt 1345) 534, where electronically generated documents were admitted. However, challenges persist, particularly regarding compliance with procedural thresholds and the authenticity of digital evidence, especially in lower courts lacking digital infrastructure.

India offers a useful comparative framework. Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act provides for similar admissibility criteria, but subsequent judicial developments, especially the Supreme Court’s decision in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020) 7 SCC 1, have clarified the mandatory nature of compliance and defined procedures for certification. Indian courts have since developed consistent standards for authenticating electronic evidence. In Nigeria, the interpretative inconsistency across courts has highlighted the need for clear judicial guidelines or statutory amendments to enhance uniform application. Nigeria’s Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015 and the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023 (NDPA) mark progressive developments in digital governance. The former criminalizes unauthorized access and data manipulation, while the latter introduces principles of data minimization, accountability, and user consent. These align with international best practices, echoing South Africa’s Protection of Personal Information Act 2013 (POPIA), which enforces data protection through an independent Information Regulator.

Judicial digitization in Nigeria has taken root in select jurisdictions, most notably Lagos and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). The introduction of e-filing platforms, virtual court hearings, and electronic case management in Lagos represents significant progress. Yet, these advancements remain localized, with many state judiciaries still dependent on manual processes. The uneven implementation raises issues of procedural equity and judicial efficiency. India’s e-Courts Mission Mode Project stands as a more cohesive and expansive example. Since its inception in 2005, the initiative has computerised thousands of courts and enabled public access to cause lists, case statuses, and judgments through a unified national platform. The Indian model’s success lies in its institutional planning, nationwide implementation strategy, and budgetary commitment from the central government. These elements are notably absent in Nigeria’s decentralised and resource-constrained legal environment.

Legal research in Nigeria is increasingly driven by platforms such as LawPavilion and TIMI, which offer access to precedents, statutes, and legal analysis. However, the cost of subscriptions renders them inaccessible to a significant portion of the legal community, including students and small law firms. This contrasts sharply with Kenya’s approach, where the National Council for Law Reporting (Kenya Law) provides free access to judicial decisions and legislation. This open-access model promotes transparency and enhances legal literacy, serving as an ideal framework for Nigerian policymakers to consider.

The ethical implications of digital transformation are yet to be comprehensively addressed in Nigeria’s legal ethics regime. While Rule 19 of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2007 protects client confidentiality, there is little guidance on digital data handling, cloud-based storage, or algorithmic legal tools. The American Bar Association’s addition of a technological competence requirement to its Model Rules offers a sharp contrast. Attorneys in states like Florida and North Carolina must undertake mandatory training on legal technology as part of their continuing legal education. These reforms acknowledge the ethical responsibilities that accompany digital proficiency, a perspective yet to be reflected in Nigeria’s Continuing Legal Education framework.

Taken together, these comparative illustrations underscore that while Nigeria has made legislative and procedural inroads towards digital legal transformation, its efforts remain fragmented and overly dependent on urban infrastructure and isolated initiatives. The lessons from other jurisdictions suggest that digitalization must be mainstreamed through deliberate state investment, educational reform, regulatory autonomy, and inclusive policy design.

Reference(S):

Books:

• Jadesola L Akande, Legal Practice in Nigeria: Trends and Challenges (University of Lagos Press 2019)
• Richard Susskind, Tomorrow’s Lawyers: An Introduction to Your Future (2nd edn, OUP 2017)

Journal Articles:

• Chidi Odinkalu, ‘Access to Justice and the Legal Profession in Nigeria’ (2001) 45(3) Journal of African Law 59
• Olumide Babalola, ‘Data Protection in Nigeria: Overview and Regulatory Framework’ (2019) 9(1) NIALS Journal of Law and Digital Policy 25

Legislation:

• Council of Legal Education Act Cap C13, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004
• Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015
• Evidence Act 2011
• Legal Practitioners Act Cap L11, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004
• Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023
• Nigeria Data Protection Regulation 2019
• Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2007

Cases:

• Simeon Nwakaudu v President FRN & Ors Suit No FHC/ABJ/CS/462/2020 (Federal High Court, unreported)

Institutional and Policy Documents:

• National Judicial Council, ‘Guidelines for Virtual Court Proceedings’ (2020)
• UN General Assembly, ‘UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce with Guide to Enactment’ (1996)

Web Sources:

• LawPavilion, ‘About Us’ https://lawpavilion.com accessed 5 June 2025
• UNDP Nigeria, ‘Access to Justice in the Digital Era’ (2023) https://www.ng.undp.org accessed 5 June 2025