site logo

FAWEHINMI VS. BABANGIDA (2003)

case summary

Supreme Court of Nigeria

Before Their Lordships:

  • Uwaifo, JSC
  • Kutigi, JSC
  • Ejiwunmi, JSC
  • Mohammed, JSC
  • Onu, JSC
  • Katsina-Alu, JSC

Parties:

Appellant:

  • Chief Gani Fawehinmi

Respondents:

  • General Ibrahim Babangida (Rtd.)
  • Brigadier-General A. K. Togun (Rtd.)
  • Brigadier-General Halilu Akilu (Rtd.)
Suit number: SC.360/2001

Background

This case revolves around the legality of the Tribunals of Inquiry Act, originally promulgated as Decree No. 41 of 1966 by the Federal Military Government. Following the transition to a democratic government and the introduction of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria, the applicability and constitutionality of this Act came under scrutiny. The Federal High Court of Nigeria was prompted to refer constitutional questions arising from two consolidated suits regarding the Act to the Court of Appeal.

Issues

The core issues determined by the Court included:

  1. Whether the Tribunals of Inquiry Decree 1966 is valid as enacted by the National Assembly under section 315 of the 1999 Constitution.
  2. Whether sections of the Act contravene sections 35 and 36 of the 1999 Constitution, thereby rendering them unconstitutional.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that:

  1. The Tribunals of Inquiry Act takes effect as an existing law but is limited to the Federal Capital Territory under the legislative powers granted to the National Assembly.
  2. The provisions allowing compulsive powers in the Act (specifically sections 5(c), 10, and 11(3)) are constitutional insofar as they apply within Abuja but unconstitutional outside that territory.

Court Findings

The Court noted that:

  1. The Act was designated as 'existing law' by the 1999 Constitution but required additional modifications to be fully compliant with new constitutional standards.
  2. The failure to specifically permit the establishment of tribunals in the 1999 Constitution contrasted with previous constitutional provisions, thereby transferring the power to enact such laws predominantly to State legislatures.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Supreme Court acknowledged the partial success of the appeals, affirming that while the Tribunals of Inquiry Act is valid as existing law within the Federal Capital Territory, its provisions relating to coercive powers infringe upon the personal liberties guaranteed under the 1999 Constitution.

Significance

This landmark case emphasizes the constitutional checks on the powers of inquiry and the necessity for clear legislative authority in matters involving personal liberty and human rights. It serves to delineate the boundaries of state versus federal legislative power regarding human rights inquiries in Nigeria.

Loading recommendations...
Loading sidebar...