UNIT 7

JUDICIAL POWER

Judicial power refers to the authority vested in courts and judges to interpret and apply the law, resolve disputes, and administer justice. It encompasses the power to hear and decide cases, interpret statutes and the constitution, and ensure that laws are enforced in accordance with legal principles. The Nigerian Constitution defines judicial power in section 6, which vests this power in the courts established by the Constitution. See the case of Adeleke v. Oyo State House of Assembly [2006] 16 NWLR (Pt. 1006) 608 where the court illustrates the exercise of judicial power in determining the validity of legislative actions.

SCOPE OF JUDICIAL POWER

See the case of Marwa v. Nyako [2012] 6 NWLR (Pt. 1296) 199 where the court demonstrates the court’s role in constitutional review. The scope of judicial power in Nigeria covers the following:

1. Interpretation of laws: this is where the courts have the power to interpret the Constitution, statutes, and other legal instruments.
2. Adjudication of disputes: this is where the courts settle disputes between individuals, between individuals and the government, and between different levels of government.
3. Constitutional review: this is where the courts have the authority to review the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions.
4. Issuance of judicial remedies: this is where the courts can issue various remedies to enforce rights and obligations, such as injunctions, damages, and declaratory judgments.

THE SUPREME COURT

The Supreme Court of Nigeria is the highest court in the country. It has both original and appellate jurisdiction, with its decisions binding on all other courts. The supreme court is composed of the Chief Justice of Nigeria and not more than twenty-one Justices and see also section 232 of the Constitution which grants the Supreme Court original jurisdiction in disputes between the Federation and states or between states and section 233 which outlines its appellate jurisdiction, which includes appeals from the Court of Appeal. See the case of A.G. Federation v. A.G. Lagos State [2013] 16 NWLR (Pt. 1380) 249 where the court showcases the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction.

THE COURT OF APPEAL

The Court of Appeal is the intermediate appellate court in Nigeria. It reviews decisions from lower courts and tribunals. The Court of Appeal consists of the President of the Court and a number of Justices as prescribed by the National Assembly. See section 240 of the Constitution which gives the Court of Appeal the jurisdiction to hear appeals from the Federal High Court, State High Courts, and other tribunals and see also the case of Daggash v. Bulama [2004] 14 NWLR (Pt. 892) 144 where the court highlights the appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal.

THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT

The Federal High Court has jurisdiction over matters specified in section 251 of the Constitution, which include issues related to the revenue of the federal government, taxation, customs and excise, banking, and other federal matters. The Federal High Court consists of the Chief Judge and such number of judges as may be prescribed by the National Assembly and the court’s jurisdiction covers matters related to the administration of federal laws and the federal government’s interests. See the case of Lagos State Government v. Eko Hotels Ltd [2006] 18 NWLR (Pt. 1011) 378 where the court demonstrates the Federal High Court’s jurisdiction over federal matters.

THE STATE HIGH COURT

State High Courts have general jurisdiction over civil and criminal matters within their respective states. Each State High Court is composed of a Chief Judge and other judges as prescribed by the State House of Assembly. See section 270 of the Constitution which grants State High Courts the jurisdiction over civil and criminal matters that are not exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court or other courts. See also the case of A.G. Lagos State v. A.G. Federation [2003] 12 NWLR (Pt. 833) 1 where the court illustrates the jurisdiction of State High Courts.

THE MAGISTRATE COURT

Magistrate Courts handle minor civil and criminal cases. They serve as the courts of first instance for less severe matters. Magistrate Courts are presided over by magistrates whose appointments are made by the state government and they have jurisdiction over minor criminal offences and civil disputes involving small sums of money. See the case of Ebenebe v. Nwaka [2009] 13 NWLR (Pt. 1158) 365 where the court showcases the jurisdiction of Magistrate Courts in civil matters.

THE CUSTOMARY COURT

Customary Courts administer customary law and handle disputes involving customary practices and traditions. Customary Courts are composed of judges or assessors knowledgeable in customary law and they have jurisdiction over matters related to marriage, inheritance, land, and other issues governed by customary law. See the case of Oyewumi v. Ogunesan [1990] 3 NWLR (Pt. 137) 182 where the court highlights the role of Customary Courts in resolving disputes based on customary law.

JUDICIAL REMEDIES

Judicial remedies are the means by which a court enforces a right, imposes a penalty, or makes another court order to impose its will. This can be through the following:

1. Damages: these are monetary compensation for harm or loss.
2. Injunctions: these are orders to do or refrain from doing a specific act.
3. Specific performance: these are orders to perform a contractual obligation.
4. Declaratory judgments: these are statements of the legal rights and obligations of parties. See the case of Araka v. Ejeagwu [2000] 15 NWLR (Pt. 692) 684 where the court illustrates the use of declaratory judgments.

NATURAL JUSTICE

The principles of natural justice are fundamental to fair adjudication. They ensure that justice is not only done but seen to be done. These principles are crucial in maintaining public confidence in the judicial system and ensuring that justice is administered fairly and impartially. See the case of Olaniyan v. University of Lagos [1985] 2 NWLR (Pt. 9) 599 where the court highlights the application of natural justice principles. It encompasses two main rules which are:

1. Audi Alteram Partem (Hear the other side): this is used where no one should be condemned unheard. See the case of Ransome-Kuti v. A.G. Federation [1985] 2 NWLR (Pt. 6) 211, where the Supreme Court emphasized the need to hear both sides before a decision.
2. Nemo Judex in Causa Sua (No one should be a judge in their own cause): this is used to ensure impartiality in decision-making. See the case of Garba v. University of Maiduguri [1986] 1 NWLR (Pt. 18) 550, where the court held that a person cannot be a judge in their own cause to avoid bias.

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURE

The Fundamental Rights (Enforcement procedure) Rules, 2009 provide the procedure for the enforcement of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. See the case of Fawehinmi v. Abacha [1996] 9 NWLR (Pt. 475) 710 where the court involves the enforcement of fundamental rights. They includes:

1. Application: this is where applications for enforcement must be brought by motion or originating summons.
2. Hearing: this is where the court must hear the application promptly and issue a decision.

JUDICIAL REVIEW

Judicial review is the power of courts to examine the actions of the legislative and executive branches of government and to invalidate actions that are unconstitutional. This is done by the following ways:

1. Legislative acts: this is used to review the laws passed by the legislature.
2. Executive actions: this is done to review the actions taken by the executive branch. See the case of A.G. Abia State v. A.G. Federation [2002] 6 NWLR (Pt. 763) 264 where the court demonstrates judicial review of executive actions.