LIMITATION ON THE RIGHT TO FAIR HEARING IN JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS IN NIGERIA
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.60787/kblsj.v1i3.27Mots-clés :
natural justice, fair hearing, limitation, constitution, judicial proceedingRésumé
The rule of natural justice as old as it has been provided the template and basis for hearing from parties before adjudication. Since then, the awareness to afford parties ample opportunity of being heard, has gained universal acceptance both within the legal, traditional, and socio-economic spheres. Evidently, the concept of fair hearing stipulates that both parties to a dispute must be given equal opportunity to present their cases. Incidentally, the specie as well as primary characteristic of the doctrine is captured as the principle of fair hearing which is enshrined in Section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended. The right to fair hearing is so fundamental that no one can contend against a person’s right to be heard. It is a natural and fundamental right which must be adhered to when there is a complaint against another person. It is against this background that the paper argued that the right to fair hearing in judicial proceedings in Nigeria is limited. The authors therefore maintained that the right to fair hearing should not be limited to judicial proceedings and other tribunals established by law. Furthermore, the authors canvassed that the twin pillars of fair hearing; audi alteram partem and nemo judex in causa sua, required that both parties be heard before reaching a verdict and that the umpire cannot be a judge in his own cause, must be observed in the resolution of any dispute as this inviolable principle of natural justice, have enjoyed steady patronage among family members, communities and customary arbitrations. Consequently, they concluded that while the specie of fair hearing can be situate in judicial proceedings, same cannot be said of the generis natural justice.
Références
Genesis 3: 9 -13
[Hereafter, The CFRN]
(2010) Vol. 180 LRCN, p. 50
(2012) Vol. 211 LRCN, P. 1
(2022) 11 NWLR [Pt. 1841] P. 365
(2012) Vol. 205 LRCN, p. 1
Section 36 (1) CFRN as amended
Ibid at S. 36
Obasan v Audu (2003) 8 NWLR, (Pt. 1887) p. 423
(2021) 2 NWLR (Pt. 1760) 208
(2021) 8 NWLR (Pt. 1779) 543
(2010) 14 WRN 125 per Ayo Salami JCA
(2002) 7 WRN 78
(2022) 12 NWLR [Pt. 1845] 411
Federal College of Education Technical Potiskum v Joseph (2020) 9 NWLR [Pt. 1729] 381
(2011) Vol. 200 LRCN 181
CFRN, 1999
(2002) 97 LRCN 946
(1968) 1 ALL NLR 306
(1997) NWLR [Pt. 506] 550
(2022) 5 NWLR [Pt. 1823] 237
(2022) 5 NWLR [Pt. 1823] 244
(2021) 6 NWLR [Pt. 1773] 499
(2020) vol. 300 LRCN 1
(2008) 1 NWLR [Pt. 1098] 98
(2022) 17 NWLR, part 1860, 549
(2022) 15 NWLR [Pt. 1852] 1
A K Anya, Disciplinary Powers of Statutory Bodies in Nigeria, (2005) 3 Benin Journal of Public Law, Pp. 140, 152
Ibid, at P. 151
(2022) 6 NWLR, [Pt. 2825] 1
(2021) 13 NWLR [Pt. 1793] 259
(2002) 46 WRN 1
(2002) 97 LRCN 946
Section 85 (1) of the 1999 Constitution
Section 15 (1) of the 5th schedule to the 1999 Constitution
Section 239 of the 1999 Constitution
Section 2 (1) of the 6th schedule to the 1999 Constitution
Section 21 Third schedule to the 1999 Constitution
Section 188 of the 1999 Constitution
Section 12 Legal Practitioners Act
Section 16 (1) of the University of Jos Act
See generally A K Anya, Disciplinary Powers of Statutory Bodies in Nigeria, (2005) 3 Benin Journal of Public Law, Pp. 140, 152
(2022) 17 NWLR Part 1858, 1
Section 36 (1) of the 1999 Constitution as amended
(2018) 5 NWLR [Pt. 1613] 383
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria
Supra, at P. 1218
Supra
Téléchargements
Publiée
Comment citer
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
(c) Tous droits réservés KB Law Scholars Journal 2024
Ce travail est disponible sous licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d’Utilisation Commerciale 4.0 International.
The author reserves the licence with little restrictions.https://kblsp.org,Ng/licence.