The year 2024 has been a transformative period in the Nigerian legal landscape – defined by significant judicial pronouncements and pivotal legislative reforms. From landmark judgments redefining the boundaries of constitutional law, fundamental rights enforcement, labour law amongst others, to groundbreaking amendments addressing cybersecurity and financial accountability, both the judiciary and legislature have been instrumental in transforming the nation’s dispute resolution framework.
The introduction of the Supreme Court Rules, 2024, for example, marked a leap towards modernizing procedures, while lawmakers also tackled complex issues with renewed vigour in other enactments made within the year in review. These strides not only refined the processes of dispute resolution but also bolstered public confidence in the justice system’s ability to adapt and deliver.
In this edition, we shall consider some pivotal changes and briefly explore their impact on Nigeria’s dispute resolution landscape. Whether you are a legal practitioner, stakeholder, or keen observer of the Nigerian legal system, we invite you to explore the progress and potentials that abound pursuant to these changes or developments. Let’s navigate this exciting journey of progress together!
- SOME LANDMARK JUDGMENTS:
- AG OF THE FEDERATION V. AG OF ABIA STATE & ORS (2024) LPELR – 62576 (SC)
The Attorney General of the Federation (“the Plaintiff”), on behalf of the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN), instituted this suit against the thirty-six States of the Federation before the Supreme Court (otherwise known as the Apex Court). The Plaintiff sought among other things, a declaration that by the combined reading of Sections 1(1), (2) and (3), 4(7), 5(2)(a) and (b) and 3(c), 7(1) and (3) and 14(1), (2)(a), (c) and (4) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) (“CFRN”), the dissolution of democratically-elected Local Government Councils by the 36 States of Nigeria was unlawful, unconstitutional, null and void. The suit was geared towards addressing the alleged non-remittance of allocations designated for Local Government Councils by State Governments. Consequently, the FGN invoked the interpretative powers of the Supreme Court regarding Section 162 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, (as amended) (“CFRN”) on the disbursement of constitutional allocations to Local Government Councils from the Federation Account.
Essentially, a key question presented to the court for determination was whether the FGN could directly disburse allocations from the federation account to the Local Government Councils. This question arose in light of the provision of Sections 162 (5), (6), and (8) of the CFRN which provide that such allocations must first be paid into the State Joint Local Government Account and thereafter disbursed to local Government Councils by the State Governments.
On 11th July 2024, the Apex Court delivered a groundbreaking judgment. It held that the FGN is empowered to disburse the Local Government allocations from the Federation Account either directly to Local Government Councils or through the States. The Court further reasoned that given the failure of the States to effectively disburse funds to the Local Government Councils, the justice of the case warranted direct disbursement from the Federation Account going forward. By this decision, the Supreme Court departed from the strict literal interpretation of Section 162 of the CFRN and adopted a more purposeful interpretation to safeguard the financial autonomy of Local Government Councils.
While many have celebrated this landmark decision calling it a watershed moment in the development of the country’s constitutional democracy, others have not been more celebratory in their remarks. Irrespective of the mixed reactions, the decision remains binding until same is overturned by the Supreme Court itself. In the aftermath of the decision, some States have reportedly begun enacting laws aimed at undermining the efficacy of the Apex Court’s decision. This sets the stage for potential “legislative-judicial Combat” in 2025 and beyond, as tensions between State Governments and the judiciary over the interpretation and implementation of constitutional provisions will continue to unfold.
