The National Judicial Council (NJC) has publicly denied a widely circulated report that 34 nominees failed an “NJC integrity test” and were removed from the shortlist for appointment to the Federal High Court. In a press statement dated 31 December 2025 and signed by Secretary Ahmed Gambo Saleh, the council described the story as inaccurate and unauthorised.
The NJC said the processes cited in the viral item were conducted entirely by the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC) and that the council itself has not taken any decision in relation to the candidates. The statement sought to correct what the NJC described as misleading coverage and to protect the reputations of those involved.
NJC integrity test clarification
According to the council, a number of applicants were discontinued at the FJSC stage following adverse findings from petitions submitted to the commission. Other candidates simply failed to attain the qualifying score required to progress to interview stage before the NJC. The council emphasised that these outcomes reflect the FJSC process and do not amount to a final NJC ruling on fitness for judicial office.
Media reports over the weekend suggested that 62 applicants had passed a computer-based test administered by the Federal High Court in Abuja and that only 28 remained after an integrity screening. The NJC disputed those figures and said the circulating account did not reflect how the selection process unfolded.
An NJC official, identified in earlier coverage as Aleh, warned that speculative reporting risks misleading the public and unfairly damaging the reputations of candidates who took part in the process in good faith. The council said it has launched an internal investigation to identify the source of the unauthorised press release and will take appropriate measures to uphold the credibility of its procedures.
The NJC underscored its commitment to transparency, fairness and due process in appointments to the bench. It urged journalists to seek confirmation from authorised channels before publishing reports on sensitive institutional matters and reiterated that any formal NJC decision would be communicated through official channels.
Legal practitioners and observers familiar with judicial appointment procedures noted that multiple bodies take part in the vetting process. The FJSC typically administers initial assessments and considers petitions, while the NJC assesses shortlisted candidates and makes recommendations for appointment. Differences in reporting can arise when media outlets conflate actions taken at different stages of that multi-step process.
Public confidence in judicial appointments depends on clarity and accurate reporting, lawyers said. Erroneous claims that suggest mass failures in integrity checks can have long-lasting effects on individuals’ careers and on trust in institutions. The NJC’s move to investigate the leak aims to stem further misinformation and reassure stakeholders that standards remain high.
The council concluded by reaffirming its dedication to maintaining rigorous standards for judicial office and warned that any person or body responsible for disseminating unauthorised statements would face appropriate scrutiny. For the time being, candidates and the public are advised to await official communications from the FJSC or NJC on the outcome of the selection process.
Key Takeaways:
- The National Judicial Council (NJC) has rejected a viral report claiming 34 nominees failed an “NJC integrity test” and were removed from Federal High Court consideration.
- The NJC said the processes in question were handled by the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC); no NJC decision has been taken on the candidates.
- Some candidates were discontinued at the FJSC stage due to petitions; others did not meet qualifying scores to advance to NJC interviews.
- The NJC has opened an internal probe to trace the unauthorised statement and urged journalists to verify sensitive reports with authorised channels.
