Article Sidebar
Published:
Sep 28, 2024DOI:
10.4314/mlr.v18i2.9Keywords:
Article Details
a) Copyright of the content of the articles shall be retained by the author subject to the condition that it cannot be republished in another journal. The reproduction of the article as book chapter requires the acknowledgement of its prior publication in Mizan Law Review.
b) An author is entitled to deposit her/his published article in any Open Access repository subject to the condition that the format and layout shall not be changed. Depositing a post-publication version in any repository requires acknowledgement of the earlier version by indicating the Volume, Issue and page numbers of the version published in Mizan Law Review.
c) Articles published in Mizan Law Review are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND)
Privacy Statement
a) Where the Editorial Team deems it necessary, the editors may remove precise reference to names of individuals in case comments.
b) The names and email addresses submitted to and published in Mizan Law Review shall not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.
Disclaimer
Opinions expressed in articles, comments, case comments and sharing thoughts do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editorial Team, or the publisher of the journal, i.e., Center for Law in Sustainable Development, St. Mary’s University.
Main Article Content
Comment: The Propriety of Locus Standi Provision in Nigeria’s Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure Rules), 2009
David Tarh-Akong Eyongndi
Foluke Oluyemisi Abimbola
Abstract
Section 46(2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (CFRN 1999) empowers the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) to make rules regulating the enforcement of human rights. In 2009, pursuant to the foregoing powers, the CJN made the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules (FREP Rules 2009). Item 3(e) of the FREP Rules 2009 conferred locus standi (LS) on persons other than those specified under section 46(1) of CFRN 1999 to institute fundamental rights enforcement suits. The issues arising are: Is locus standi a substantive or procedural matter? Whether or not by section 46(1), (3) and (4) of the CFRN 1999, the CJN has the vires to make rules on locus standi; what is the status of the FREP Rules 2009 vis-à-vis the Constitution? Through comparative methods, it is argued that locus standi is a substantive matter; hence, the CJN lacks the vires to make rules on it. The comparative experience in Kenya and South Africa is examined to draw lessons in promoting access to justice which is one of the sustainable development goals (SDGs). Since Item 3(e) of the FREP Rules is ultra vires, its nullification and amendment of section 46(1) of CFRN 1999 are suggested to encapsulate the expansion under the FREP Rules 2009 as leeway.
