FROM STREET JUSTICE TO SUPREME COURT: COMPARATIVE CRIMINAL ACCOUNTABILITY IN NIGERIA, SOUTH AFRICA, MOZAMBIQUE AND THE UNITED KINGDOM

Abstract

This paper examined the evolution of criminal accountability from informal and extra-judicial practices, often described as “street justice,” to formal adjudication within superior courts in Nigeria, South Africa, Mozambique, and the United Kingdom. The paper adopted a doctrinal legal research method, analysing constitutional provisions, criminal statutes, case law, and regional and international human rights instruments governing criminal responsibility and due process across the selected jurisdictions. The paper identified key challenges, including weak law enforcement capacity, delays in criminal trials, public distrust in justice institutions, uneven application of due process guarantees, and the continued tolerance of vigilante practices in some societies. It further observed that while the United Kingdom and South Africa have largely institutionalised criminal accountability through robust judicial systems, Nigeria and Mozambique continue to experience tensions between formal legal processes and informal justice mechanisms. The paper concluded that sustainable criminal accountability depends on the credibility, accessibility, and efficiency of formal courts. It recommended strengthening judicial capacity, enhancing procedural safeguards, promoting public legal education, and reinforcing accountability of law enforcement agencies to bridge the gap between street justice and constitutional adjudication.