jurisdiction/application of provisions of administration of criminal justice act, 2015 to state high...

JURISDICTION/APPLICATION OF PROVISIONS OF ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT, 2015 TO STATE

HIGH COURTS

A PAPER PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION BY

AMEDU J. SULE (ESQ)PROSECUTION DEPT. ICPC

AT THE AUDITORIUM ICPC HEADQUARTERS, ABUJA

ON 26TH OCTOBER, 2015

INTRODUCTION

The imperative of understanding or the relevance of the topic ‘’ JURISDICTION OF ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT, 2015’’ to state high courts in Nigeria can never be over emphasised.

INTRODUCTION cont.

• By virtue of the provisions of section 61(3) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000, though a federal enactment, it however confers jurisdiction on the state High Courts to handle and determine offences created therein.

• In another words all the offences contained therein are tried by the state High Courts.

INTRODUCTION cont.

• Prior to the enactment 0f the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015, state High Courts conferred with jurisdictions to try Federal offences particularly the states within Southern part of Nigeria had recourse to the Criminal Procedure Act Cap. C. 41 Laws of the Federation with commencement period of 1st June, 1945.

• While in the case of Federal Capital Territory, it was Criminal Procedure (Northern States) Act Cap. C. 42 Laws of the Federation 2004.

INTRODUCTION cont.

• By virtue of the provisions of section 493 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015, CPA, Cap. C. 41, CPC Act Cap. C. 42, Administration of Justice Commission Act Cap. A3 laws of the Federation 2004 are all REPPEALED.

What then is the position of the Corrupt Practices And Other Related Offences Act 2000 and other similar Federal enactments vis a vice the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015?

INTRODUCTION cont.

• This paper though limited in scope, shall attempt to examine the meaning of Federal offence, sources of jurisdiction of Courts in Nigeria, provisions of 1999 Constitution (as amended), provisions of Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015. And further attempts to see whether or not the state High Court would benefit from huge or enamours advantages created in the administration of criminal justice delivery.

DEFINITION OF TERMS

Definition of terms • We shall only attempt to define some of the terms in

operational sense in order to avoid technical problems associated with definition.

Federal laws: Section 494 of Administration of Criminal Justice Act

2015, sees it as ‘’... any act enacted by the National Assembly having effect with respect to the Federation or any part thereof’’; and

• any enactment prior to 15th October, 1960, which under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria has effect with respect to the Federation or any part thereof.’’

DEFINITION cont.

Jurisdiction: According to the Halbury’s laws of England, jurisdiction is defines as;

‘’ the authority which a court has to decide matters that litigated before it or to take cognisance of matters presented in a formal way for its decision.’’ • In the case of Ajomale Vs Yaduat (No.1){1991}5SCNJ172 ‘’ that jurisdiction is the right in the court to hear and determine the dispute between parties ....’’ • Also in the words of a University Don Ben O. Igwenyi ‘’jurisdiction is the power or authority of a court of law or tribunal to go into the matter and deliver a binding judgement’’

DEFINITION cont.

HIGH COURT • Section 494 Administration of Criminal Justice Act

2015, defines court in the following terms; ‘’includes Federal courts, the magistrates court and Federal Capital Territory.’’• So much for definition of terms, • Please note that in the course of discussion, this

definition of court would be referred to or considered.

SOURCES OF JURISDICTION

SOURCES OF JURISDICTION OF NIGERIAN COURTS• It must be noted that jurisdiction of Nigerian

Courts do not come as a bolt from the blue. • Nor do courts indulged in the rat race of jostling for

jurisdiction. • These sources include: a) The Constitution b) Statutes; and c) Inherent powers

SOURCES OF JURISDICTION cont.

• The Constitution: This is the primary source of jurisdiction of superior courts of record in Nigeria. See the case of Ada Vs NYSC (2004)13 NWLR (pt.891) at 639.

• The Statutes: Aside from the constitution, Statutes are next veritable source of jurisdiction of Courts.

Example, The Corrupt Practices And Other Related Offences Act 2000. Please note section 61(3) of the Act

SOURCES OF JURISDICTION cont.

• Inherent Powers: Adjunct to the other two sources of jurisdiction highlighted above is the inherent powers of court.

Section 6(6) (a) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) provides thus: ‘’The judicial powers vested in accordance with this section

shall extend not withstanding anything to the contrary in the constitution to all inherent power and sanction of a court of law.’’

For instance the court has powers to regulate its proceedings, punish for contempt and prevent abuse of its process/powers.

JURISDICTION OF STATE HIGH IN RESPECT OF FEDERAL MATTERS

• Section 286 (1) of 1999 constitution (as amended) provides as follows:

a) Where by the law of a state jurisdiction is conferred upon any court for the hearing and determination of civil causes and of appeals arising out of such causes, the court shall have like jurisdiction with respect to the hearing and determination to the Federal causes and appeals arising out of such causes;

JURISDICTION OF STATE HIGH cont.

b) Where by the law of a state jurisdiction is conferred upon any court for the investigation, inquiry into, or trial of persons accused of offences against the laws of the state and with the respect of hearing and determination of appeals arising out of any such trial or out of any proceedings connected therewith, the court shall have like jurisdiction with respect to investigation, inquiry into, or trial of persons for Federal offences and the hearing and determination of appeals arising out of the trial or proceedings; and


c) The jurisdiction conferred on a court of a State pursuant to the provisions of this section shall be exercised in conformity with the practice and procedure for the time being prescribed in relation to its jurisdiction over civil or criminal causes OTHER THAN FEDERAL CAUSES.


(2) Nothing in this section shall be construed,

except in so far as other provisions have been made by the operation of sections 299 and 301 of this Constitution, as conferring jurisdiction in respect of Federal causes or Federal offences upon a court presided over by a person who is not or has not been qualified to practise as a legal practitioner in Nigeria.


(3) In this section, unless the context otherwise requires- ‘’causes’’ includes matters; ‘’Federal causes’’ means civil or criminal causes relating to any matter with respect to which the National assembly has power to make law; and ‘’Federal offence’’ means an offence contrary to the provision of an Act of National assembly or any law having effect as if so enacted.

JURISDICTION UNDER ADMINISTRATION OF

CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2015 • By virtue of the provisions of section 2(1) of the

Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 the issue of jurisdiction is settled beyond all reasonable doubt. It provides thus;

‘’without prejudice to section 86 of this Act, the provisions of this Act shall apply to criminal trials for Federal offences established by an Act of National Assembly and other offences punishable in the Federal Capital Territory Abuja.’’

JURISDICTION UNDER ACJA 2015

• Section 2 (2) provides as follows; ‘’the provisions of this Act shall not apply to a

court martial.’’ It must be submitted with respect that the only

court that its jurisdiction is ousted is court martial. It therefore follows that all courts of competent jurisdictions that are not expressly ousted have their jurisdiction intact and save. The issue of ouster of jurisdiction must be expressly stated in the statute.


• The Supreme court in the case of Sonnar (Nig.) Ltd Vs Nord Wind (1987) 4 NWLR (pt. 66) 520 at 576 as per Oputa JSC stated as follows:-

‘’our courts should not be eager to twist themselves of jurisdiction conferred on them by the constitution and other laws, court guard rather jealously their jurisdiction and even where there is an ouster of that jurisdiction by statute it should be clear and unequivocal words ....’’


Please note • Section 494 defines terms used in the Act. Some of

the terms are relevant to this topic. These include but not limited to the following:-

a)‘’Court’’ – include Federal High Courts, Magistrate Courts ...... etc b)‘’High Court’’ means, the Federal High Court or the High Court of Federal Capital Territory.


• All the above provisions do not pretend to oust the jurisdiction of other courts especially donated by the 1999 constitution (as amended).

• See the provisions of section 1 (3) of 1999 constitution (as amended).

Note , the issue of jurisdiction, powers, practices and procedure of court are contained in supplemental part of the constitution.

CONCLUSION

• With regard to the Federal offences, it is generally submitted that State High Courts are clothed with jurisdiction to try same under the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015.

• The corrupt practices And Other Related Offences Act 2000 although , a federal law confers jurisdiction on the state High Courts and such benefits fully from the Administration Of Criminal Justice Act 2015 .

CONCLUSION

THANK YOU

jurisdiction/application of provisions of administration of criminal justice act, 2015 to state high...

Documents