Justice at a Cost — Fines, Bail, and the True Price of Freedom in Nigeria and the U.S.

Advertisement

By Newspot Nigeria

In the pursuit of justice, both Nigeria and the United States have erected financial hurdles—some so high they defeat the very essence of democracy. Recent findings from the Becker Friedman Institute’s research brief, “Laffer’s Day in Court: The Revenue Effects of Criminal Justice Fees and Fines,” expose a troubling economic truth: the higher the fines for criminal defendants, the less likely governments are to collect them. It’s a real-world illustration of the famed Laffer Curve, which economists use to describe how excessive taxation can actually reduce revenue.

This paradox is not foreign to Nigeria’s own justice system. Though less quantified, its presence is deeply felt—particularly in the way bail and financial penalties are imposed and mismanaged. The Nigerian bail system, as documented in the Achievers University Law Journal in the article “Bail Bond and Forfeiture Actions in Nigeria: Lessons from the Case of Senator Ali Ndume”, reflects a legal culture that continues to struggle with balancing liberty, revenue, and the rule of law.

In Nigeria, the legal requirement of bail exists to protect constitutional rights—most notably, the presumption of innocence and the right to personal liberty. Yet, in reality, suspects are frequently held beyond the legal 24-hour window. Bribes disguised as “bail fees” are demanded informally, and those who stand as sureties face potential imprisonment—not just forfeiture—if the accused absconds or paperwork appears questionable, as the Ali Ndume case has shown.

So how do these two systems compare?

Advertisement

In Florida, USA, the study found that 31% of felony defendants are so financially overburdened that reducing their court fines could actually increase revenue. Meanwhile, in Nigeria, police bail is supposed to be free by law, yet enforcement officers often use it as a source of informal revenue. In both systems, the financially marginalized—often poor or minority individuals—bear the harshest brunt of policies meant to sustain judicial operations.

The question is not whether the state should recoup costs of prosecution or guarantee appearances in court. That is valid. The real issue is how that goal is pursued. Both the Laffer Curve study and the Nigerian legal review point toward a conclusion that is as economic as it is moral: you can’t squeeze revenue out of those who have nothing to give.

What’s more disturbing is that these financial penalties don’t just affect the accused. In Nigeria, the role of a surety is legally structured, yet misunderstood by the public and often abused by institutions. Sureties are supposed to ensure court attendance—not face detention if things go wrong. As noted in the Ali Ndume case, imprisonment occurred not because Maina jumped bail, but because of a dispute over the validity of the property pledged as security. Public confidence in justice cannot thrive under such vague and punitive threats.

What should be done?

From both sides of the Atlantic, the solution lies in tailoring justice to economic reality. In the U.S., the research suggests reducing fines for low-income defendants and reserving higher penalties for those with a demonstrated ability to pay. In Nigeria, similar logic should apply: release suspects when the law says so, demand bail conditions that reflect reality, and protect—rather than punish—those who stand in to uphold justice through suretyship.

Additionally, Nigeria needs greater public education on bail rights and obligations, along with structural reform of the police and court systems. Courts should also adopt evidence-based frameworks that consider payment histories and financial capacity before setting fines or bail terms.

Justice should not be sold to the highest bidder—or withheld from the poorest defendant. Whether through excessive LFOs in Florida or unreceipted “bail charges” at Nigerian police stations, both systems reveal a troubling drift away from democratic values. In the end, the real price of freedom should not be confusion, corruption, or coercion.

It should be justice—equally accessible, clearly defined, and fairly administered.

Published by Newspot Nigeria—where equity meets accountability.