The integrity of the Nigerian judiciary hangs in the balance as the Supreme Court is set to rule on a highly anticipated case concerning the constitutionality of certain federal Acts. The case, Attorney General of Kogi State and 16 Others v. Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), was brought before the apex court on October 8, 2024, and has been adjourned for hearing on October 22, 2024......Read The Full Article>>.....Read The Full Article>>
At the heart of the legal dispute is whether several federal Acts, including the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Act, were constitutionally enacted without the required input from state governments. The plaintiffs, represented by the Attorneys General of Kogi State and 16 other states, argue that the federal government violated Nigeria’s federalist principles by passing these laws without proper consultation or involvement of the states. They contend that the affected laws pertain to matters not included on the exclusive legislative list, meaning that the federal government overstepped its constitutional bounds by enacting these laws unilaterally.
Legal analysts and constitutional scholars are confident that the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, will uphold the principles of federalism and the rule of law. Justice Kekere-Ekun has previously underscored her commitment to preserving the judiciary’s independence and ensuring that justice is served impartially. This case is seen as a significant test of that commitment.
The core of the plaintiffs’ argument is based on Section 12 of the 1999 Constitution, which requires the involvement of state governments in enacting any law tied to international conventions, such as the United Nations Convention underpinning the EFCC Act. The failure to involve the states, they argue, renders the Acts unconstitutional. The plaintiffs further cite the landmark case ofMacfoy v. UAC, asserting that an act done contrary to mandatory legal requirements is a nullity.
While the federal government has not disputed the facts, it maintains that state concurrence was not required for the enactment of the challenged laws. Legal commentators have criticized this stance as flawed and contrary to the tenets of true federalism.
The upcoming ruling is expected to clarify the boundaries of federal and state powers in Nigeria’s federal system. Observers have drawn parallels between this case and the Supreme Court’s decision in the Naira redesign case, where the court similarly ruled against the federal government’s unilateral actions.
As the nation waits for the October 22 hearing, all eyes are on the Supreme Court to see whether it will uphold the constitution, reaffirm Nigeria’s federal structure, and safeguard the independence of the judiciary.
U. F. Umoru, Esq. Bashar Road,
Kongo Campus, Zaria
