Judicial intervention in arbitral proceedings under Nigeria's arbitration legislation: Supportive or disruptive?

Judicial intervention in arbitration is widely acknowledged by experts as necessary for the effectiveness of the process. This notwithstanding, most jurisdictions limit the extent of intervention so that the object of arbitration which is to obtain the fair resolution of disputes without unnecessary delay, is not defeated. One of such jurisdictions is Nigeria. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act (ACA) 1988 and the Arbitration and Mediation Act (AMA) 2023 control court involvement in arbitral proceedings by restricting intervention to certain stages of the process, perceived as requiring the support of the courts. But in reality, does judicial intervention by the Nigerian courts in arbitral proceedings under these legislation actually support the process? Or does it disrupt it? This article will examine the significance of the well-established arbitral principle of judicial non-intervention as entrenched in Nigerian law and international instruments. It will then assess the role played by the Nigerian courts in arbitration against the backdrop of the instances of court intervention under the ACA 1988 and AMA 2023. Having considered these issues, the article will argue that judicial intervention by the Nigerian courts in arbitral proceedings under Nigerian law is supportive as well as disruptive of arbitration, and then conclude with proposals for entrenching acceptable limits for court intervention in arbitration in Nigeria.