Notifications
Clear all

ENFORCEMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT –CONDITION PRECEDENT TO THE EXERCISE OF THE COURT’S JURISDICTION IN AN ACTION FOR ENFORCEMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT

1 Posts
1 Users
0 Likes
324 Views
 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
Topic starter  

It is a condition precedent to the exercise of the court's jurisdiction that the enforcement of fundamental right or securing the enforcement thereof should be the main or principal claim and not accessory claim. Therefore, before a Claimant/Applicant can successfully bring an action for the enforcement of his/her fundamental rights under the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, the main or principal claim being sought by him/her must be restricted to the enforcement of the rights guaranteed under Chapter 4 of the 1999 Constitution and/or at best the provisions of the African Charter for Human and Peoples Rights and nothing more. In Abdulhamid V Akar [2006] 13 NWLR (Pt 996) 127; (2006) 5 SC (Pt 1) 44; (2006) LPELR 24 (SC) 24 Paras C - G; the Apex Court, Per AKINTAN, JSC held:
"The position of the law is that for a claim to qualify as falling under fundamental rights, it must be clear that the principal relief sought is for the enforcement or for securing the enforcement of a fundamental right and not from the nature of the claim, to redress a grievance that is ancillary to the principal relief which itself is not ipso facto a claim for the enforcement of fundamental right. Thus, where the alleged breach of a fundamental right is ancillary or incidental to the substantive claim of the ordinary civil or common law nature, it will be incompetent to constitute the claim as one for the enforcement of a fundamental right"

The above position was re-echoed by ONU, JSC in University Of Ilorin V Oluwadare [2006] 14 NWLR (PT 1000) 751; (2006) 6-7 SC 154; (2006) LPELR 3417 (SC) 11 paras G - F, where the Learned Justice of the Supreme Court stated:

"In the case of Tukur v Government of Gongola State [1997] 6 NWLR (Pt 510) 549 at 574 - 579, this Honourable Court held as follows:-

"When application is brought under the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 1979 a condition precedent to the exercise of the court's jurisdiction is that the enforcement of fundamental rights or the security of the enforcement thereof should be the main claim and not an accessory claim. Enforcement of fundamental rights as presented and not accessory claim. See The Federal Minister of Internal Affairs &Ors. v Shugaba Abdulraman  Darman  (1982)  2  NCLR 915 in the principal claim was a declaration that the order ... was ultra vires and that the same constituted a violation of his fundamental rights to personal liberty, privacy and freedom to move freely throughout Nigeria ...

However, where the main or principal claim is not the enforcement or securing the enforcement of and fundamental, the jurisdiction of the court cannot as has been pointed out above, be properly exercised as it will be incompetent by reason of the foregoing feature of the case."

See also WAEC V Akinkunmi [2008] 9 NWLR (Pt 1091) 151 SC; Egbuono V Borno Radio Television Corporation [1997] 12 NWLR (Pt 531) 29”.

 

 

PER A.O OBASEKI- ADEJUMO IN THE CASE OF CENTRAL BANK OF NIGERIAV. CHIEF DANIEL OBAMENEKE OKEMUO & ANOR; LER:(2016)CA/L/1208/2010


Quote
Share: