Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 36 views

    The New Dimension To Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure in Nigeria and The Concept of Locus Standi

    Uploaded by

    Akin Olawale Oluwadayisi
    THE NEW DIMENSION TO FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURE IN NIGERIA AND THE CONCEPT OF LOCUS STANDI: IS THERE STILL LIMITATION? INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES This is simply the process through which the rights enshrined in chapter 4 of 1999 Constitution(as amended) can be enforced in the court of law. Section 46 of 1999 Constitution(as amended) provides: any person who alleges that any of the provisions of chapter 4 has been, is being or likely to be contravened in any state in relation to him may apply to the High Court in that state for redress. This provision serves as the basic foundation upon which an application for the enforcement of fundamental rights is commenced. However, the constitution does not state the provision for enforcement of the rights that is purportedly breached. Thus, the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009 was made to guide the way and manner in which these rights can be enforced. The understanding that is expected of this study is the how to approach court whenever there is a breach of rights, what to file when commencing action, court to go to and matters that can be covered by the process. It will also explain other administrative procedures of seeking judicial redress similar to enforcement of rights process. Generally, sanction and costs relates to civil matters as contained within the scope of rules of court. The power of court to sanction and award costs and their purpose in civil trial will be discussed. APPLICABLE RULES The applicable rules and laws include the following: a. The Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) b. Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009 c. Federal High Court Civil Procedure Rules 2009 d. High Court Civil Procedure Rules of various states. COURTS WITH JURISDICTION By virtue of Section 46 1999 Constitution and Order 1 Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009, both the High Court and Federal High has jurisdiction. The section provides that: Section 46(1) and (2): Any person who alleges that any of the provisions of this Chapter (which is chapter four on Fundamental Human Rights) has been, is being or likely to be contravened in any State in relation to him may apply to a High Court in that State for redress. Thus, subject to the provisions of the Constitution, a High Court shall have original jurisdiction to hear and determine any application made to it in pursuance of this section and may make such orders, issue such writs and give such directions as it may consider appropriate for the purpose of enforcement or securing the enforcing within that State of any right to which the person who makes the application may be entitled under Chapter four. Again, the restriction that the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court in respect of Fundamental Rights Enforcement Proceedings is not general but restricted to items provided under Section 251 of 1999 constitution has been, resolved by the Supreme Court decision in Grace Jack v. University of Agriculture, Markurdi (2004)5 NWLR (Pt. 856) 208 at P. 225. Accordingly, the rule now is that both the Federal High Court and High Court of state have concurrent jurisdiction in matters of the enforcement of a person’s fundamental rights. As a result, an application may therefore be made either to the judicial division of the Federal High Court in the State or the High Court of the state in which the breach occurred; is occurring or about to occur. See Grace Jack v. University of Agriculture, Markurdi Supra. ¬ In the exercise of its jurisdiction, the court shall constantly and conscientiously seek to give effect to the overriding objectives of the rules at every stage of human rights action, especially whenever it exercises any power given it by the rules or any other law and whenever it applies or interprets any rule. The court may make consequential orders as may be just and expedient for the purpose of advancing the applicant’s rights and freedom. The court is en

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    The New Dimension To Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure in Nigeria and The Concept of Locus Standi

    Uploaded by

    Akin Olawale Oluwadayisi
    36 views1 page
    THE NEW DIMENSION TO FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURE IN NIGERIA AND THE CONCEPT OF LOCUS STANDI: IS THERE STILL LIMITATION? INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES This is simply the process through which the rights enshrined in chapter 4 of 1999 Constitution(as amended) can be enforced in the court of law. Section 46 of 1999 Constitution(as amended) provides: any person who alleges that any of the provisions of chapter 4 has been, is being or likely to be contravened in any state in relation to him may apply to the High Court in that state for redress. This provision serves as the basic foundation upon which an application for the enforcement of fundamental rights is commenced. However, the constitution does not state the provision for enforcement of the rights that is purportedly breached. Thus, the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009 was made to guide the way and manner in which these rights can be enforced. The understanding that is expected of this study is the how to approach court whenever there is a breach of rights, what to file when commencing action, court to go to and matters that can be covered by the process. It will also explain other administrative procedures of seeking judicial redress similar to enforcement of rights process. Generally, sanction and costs relates to civil matters as contained within the scope of rules of court. The power of court to sanction and award costs and their purpose in civil trial will be discussed. APPLICABLE RULES The applicable rules and laws include the following: a. The Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) b. Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009 c. Federal High Court Civil Procedure Rules 2009 d. High Court Civil Procedure Rules of various states. COURTS WITH JURISDICTION By virtue of Section 46 1999 Constitution and Order 1 Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009, both the High Court and Federal High has jurisdiction. The section provides that: Section 46(1) and (2): Any person who alleges that any of the provisions of this Chapter (which is chapter four on Fundamental Human Rights) has been, is being or likely to be contravened in any State in relation to him may apply to a High Court in that State for redress. Thus, subject to the provisions of the Constitution, a High Court shall have original jurisdiction to hear and determine any application made to it in pursuance of this section and may make such orders, issue such writs and give such directions as it may consider appropriate for the purpose of enforcement or securing the enforcing within that State of any right to which the person who makes the application may be entitled under Chapter four. Again, the restriction that the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court in respect of Fundamental Rights Enforcement Proceedings is not general but restricted to items provided under Section 251 of 1999 constitution has been, resolved by the Supreme Court decision in Grace Jack v. University of Agriculture, Markurdi (2004)5 NWLR (Pt. 856) 208 at P. 225. Accordingly, the rule now is that both the Federal High Court and High Court of state have concurrent jurisdiction in matters of the enforcement of a person’s fundamental rights. As a result, an application may therefore be made either to the judicial division of the Federal High Court in the State or the High Court of the state in which the breach occurred; is occurring or about to occur. See Grace Jack v. University of Agriculture, Markurdi Supra. ¬ In the exercise of its jurisdiction, the court shall constantly and conscientiously seek to give effect to the overriding objectives of the rules at every stage of human rights action, especially whenever it exercises any power given it by the rules or any other law and whenever it applies or interprets any rule. The court may make consequential orders as may be just and expedient for the purpose of advancing the applicant’s rights and freedom. The court is en

    Original Title

    The New Dimension to Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure in Nigeria and the Concept of Locus Standi

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    THE NEW DIMENSION TO FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURE IN NIGERIA AND THE CONCEPT OF LOCUS STANDI: IS THERE STILL LIMITATION? INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES This is simply the process through which the rights enshrined in chapter 4 of 1999 Constitution(as amended) can be enforced in the court of law. Section 46 of 1999 Constitution(as amended) provides: any person who alleges that any of the provisions of chapter 4 has been, is being or likely to be contravened in any state in relation to him may apply to the High Court in that state for redress. This provision serves as the basic foundation upon which an application for the enforcement of fundamental rights is commenced. However, the constitution does not state the provision for enforcement of the rights that is purportedly breached. Thus, the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009 was made to guide the way and manner in which these rights can be enforced. The understanding that is expected of this study is the how to approach court whenever there is a breach of rights, what to file when commencing action, court to go to and matters that can be covered by the process. It will also explain other administrative procedures of seeking judicial redress similar to enforcement of rights process. Generally, sanction and costs relates to civil matters as contained within the scope of rules of court. The power of court to sanction and award costs and their purpose in civil trial will be discussed. APPLICABLE RULES The applicable rules and laws include the following: a. The Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) b. Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009 c. Federal High Court Civil Procedure Rules 2009 d. High Court Civil Procedure Rules of various states. COURTS WITH JURISDICTION By virtue of Section 46 1999 Constitution and Order 1 Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009, both the High Court and Federal High has jurisdiction. The section provides that: Section 46(1) and (2): Any person who alleges that any of the provisions of this Chapter (which is chapter four on Fundamental Human Rights) has been, is being or likely to be contravened in any State in relation to him may apply to a High Court in that State for redress. Thus, subject to the provisions of the Constitution, a High Court shall have original jurisdiction to hear and determine any application made to it in pursuance of this section and may make such orders, issue such writs and give such directions as it may consider appropriate for the purpose of enforcement or securing the enforcing within that State of any right to which the person who makes the application may be entitled under Chapter four. Again, the restriction that the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court in respect of Fundamental Rights Enforcement Proceedings is not general but restricted to items provided under Section 251 of 1999 constitution has been, resolved by the Supreme Court decision in Grace Jack v. University of Agriculture, Markurdi (2004)5 NWLR (Pt. 856) 208 at P. 225. Accordingly, the rule now is that both the Federal High Court and High Court of state have concurrent jurisdiction in matters of the enforcement of a person’s fundamental rights. As a result, an application may therefore be made either to the judicial division of the Federal High Court in the State or the High Court of the state in which the breach occurred; is occurring or about to occur. See Grace Jack v. University of Agriculture, Markurdi Supra. ¬ In the exercise of its jurisdiction, the court shall constantly and conscientiously seek to give effect to the overriding objectives of the rules at every stage of human rights action, especially whenever it exercises any power given it by the rules or any other law and whenever it applies or interprets any rule. The court may make consequential orders as may be just and expedient for the purpose of advancing the applicant’s rights and freedom. The court is en

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    36 views1 page

    The New Dimension To Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure in Nigeria and The Concept of Locus Standi

    Uploaded by

    Akin Olawale Oluwadayisi
    THE NEW DIMENSION TO FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURE IN NIGERIA AND THE CONCEPT OF LOCUS STANDI: IS THERE STILL LIMITATION? INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES This is simply the process through which the rights enshrined in chapter 4 of 1999 Constitution(as amended) can be enforced in the court of law. Section 46 of 1999 Constitution(as amended) provides: any person who alleges that any of the provisions of chapter 4 has been, is being or likely to be contravened in any state in relation to him may apply to the High Court in that state for redress. This provision serves as the basic foundation upon which an application for the enforcement of fundamental rights is commenced. However, the constitution does not state the provision for enforcement of the rights that is purportedly breached. Thus, the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009 was made to guide the way and manner in which these rights can be enforced. The understanding that is expected of this study is the how to approach court whenever there is a breach of rights, what to file when commencing action, court to go to and matters that can be covered by the process. It will also explain other administrative procedures of seeking judicial redress similar to enforcement of rights process. Generally, sanction and costs relates to civil matters as contained within the scope of rules of court. The power of court to sanction and award costs and their purpose in civil trial will be discussed. APPLICABLE RULES The applicable rules and laws include the following: a. The Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) b. Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009 c. Federal High Court Civil Procedure Rules 2009 d. High Court Civil Procedure Rules of various states. COURTS WITH JURISDICTION By virtue of Section 46 1999 Constitution and Order 1 Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009, both the High Court and Federal High has jurisdiction. The section provides that: Section 46(1) and (2): Any person who alleges that any of the provisions of this Chapter (which is chapter four on Fundamental Human Rights) has been, is being or likely to be contravened in any State in relation to him may apply to a High Court in that State for redress. Thus, subject to the provisions of the Constitution, a High Court shall have original jurisdiction to hear and determine any application made to it in pursuance of this section and may make such orders, issue such writs and give such directions as it may consider appropriate for the purpose of enforcement or securing the enforcing within that State of any right to which the person who makes the application may be entitled under Chapter four. Again, the restriction that the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court in respect of Fundamental Rights Enforcement Proceedings is not general but restricted to items provided under Section 251 of 1999 constitution has been, resolved by the Supreme Court decision in Grace Jack v. University of Agriculture, Markurdi (2004)5 NWLR (Pt. 856) 208 at P. 225. Accordingly, the rule now is that both the Federal High Court and High Court of state have concurrent jurisdiction in matters of the enforcement of a person’s fundamental rights. As a result, an application may therefore be made either to the judicial division of the Federal High Court in the State or the High Court of the state in which the breach occurred; is occurring or about to occur. See Grace Jack v. University of Agriculture, Markurdi Supra. ¬ In the exercise of its jurisdiction, the court shall constantly and conscientiously seek to give effect to the overriding objectives of the rules at every stage of human rights action, especially whenever it exercises any power given it by the rules or any other law and whenever it applies or interprets any rule. The court may make consequential orders as may be just and expedient for the purpose of advancing the applicant’s rights and freedom. The court is en

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    THE NEW DIMENSION TO FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURE IN NIGERIA AND THE CONCEPT OF LOCUS STANDI: IS THERE STILL

    LIMITATION?

    You might also like