Falana condemns Judges attack on public interest litigation

June 3, 2019
104 Views
https://nationaldailyng.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/966-Babe-320x100.gif

A frontline human rights lawyer, Femi Falana SAN, has condemned Judges over attacks on public interest litigation by legal practitioners in Nigeria.

Falana decried that in recent time, some High Court Judges were reported to have imposed fines ranging from N5 million to N10 million on concerned citizens whose cases were struck out for want of locus standi.

Falana had protested: “With respect, the renewed attack on public interest litigation by judges cannot be justified under the Constitution and the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act.

“Specifically, the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules 2009 have enjoined judges to encourage public interest litigation in promoting the human rights of Nigerian people.

“Ex abundanti cautela, the doctrine of locus standi has been abolished in the area of human rights by Order III of the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009.”

He argued that “Since access to court has been guaranteed by sections 6 and 36 of the 1999 Constitution and article 7 of the African Charter on Hunan and Peoples Rights Act, it is illegal and unconstitutional to impose fines on aggrieved citizens who approach the courts to challenge the illegal official policies or unconstitutuonal legislations under the current democratic dispensation.”

Falana maintained: “as far as the law stands, no judge has the power to order a litigant to pay costs outside the ambit of the Rules of the respective High Courts.

“Even in the award of costs litigants and their counsel are given fair hearing by judges. Why then are fines imposed on litigants or lawyers without allowing them to make any representation?”

The human rights lawyer, therefore, declared: “I wish to state that no judge is empowered by the Constitution, High Court Law or Rules of Court to impose fines of N5 million or N10 million on a litigant who has not been tried and convicted for committing a criminal offence in Nigeria.

“We are, therefore, compelled to draw the attention of our judges to the case of Fawehinmi v Akilu (1997) NWLR (Pt 65) 979 wherein the Supreme Court overruled the case of Abraham Adesanya v The President (1981) ANLR 1.

“Since the anachronistic doctrine has been set aside to pave way for public interest litigation, our judges should desist from striking out or dismissing cases which are filed to challenge impunity of public officers in Nigeria,” Falana advocated.

Post Views: 93

You may be interested

Expert reveals how you can improve your baby’s brilliance in first 1000 days
Health
Health

Expert reveals how you can improve your baby’s brilliance in first 1000 days

Webby - January 29, 2022

Spread the loveA Kaduna-based nutritionist, Mrs Jane Gwani, says proper nutrition in the first 1,000 days of life is key…

Tinubu Denies Travelling For Medical Treatment In UK, Says He Went For Meeting Abroad
News
News

Tinubu Denies Travelling For Medical Treatment In UK, Says He Went For Meeting Abroad

Webby - January 29, 2022

The National Leader of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Bola Tinubu has denied reports that he traveled to seek medical…

$20m Suit: Chris Brown Speaks Amid R*pe Allegations
News
5 views
News
5 views

$20m Suit: Chris Brown Speaks Amid R*pe Allegations

Webby - January 29, 2022

 Chris Brown, the popular American singer, has spoken out amid rape allegations levelled against him, as revealed by court documents…

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.