The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • Can a state legislature validly suspend an elected council chairman?

    Can a state legislature validly suspend an elected council chairman?

    What are the limits of a House of Assembly’s powers over local government chairmen, given the Supreme Court judgment on council autonomy? Was the suspension of chairmen by the Edo State House of Assembly lawful? Assistant Editor ERIC IKHILAE sought the views of legal titans.

    The nation woke up to an unusual occurrence on December 17 when the Edo State House of Assembly announced the suspension, for two months, of the democratically elected chairmen and vice chairmen of the state’s 18 Local Government Areas (LGAs).

    The House of Assembly directed the leaders of the legislative arms of the LGAs to take over the leadership of their respective councils.

    The state legislature gave the directives after passing a motion moved by the member representing Esan North East I, Isibor Adeh and seconded by the member representing Akoko-Edo II, Donald Okogbe, following a petition sent to the House the previous day by the Governor, Monday Okpebholo.

    Okpebholo had, in the petition, claimed among others, that the chairmen refused to submit their LGAs’ financial records to the state government.

    The governor described the action of the chairmen as an act of insubordination and gross misconduct and requested the House to look into the matter.

    The development attracted varied reactions.

    Justifying suspension

    In attempting to justify the suspension, an official of state government, Kassim Afegbua, claimed that the state’s lawmakers acted lawfully in suspending the elected LGAs’ Chairmen.

    Afegbua argued that the Supreme Court’s judgment on financial autonomy for local governments did not override the powers of states’ assemblies to exercise oversight powers over LGAs.

    He contended that the suspension was initiated to allow for an investigation into the councils’ financial activities, but not outright removal.

    Afegbua said: “The judgment of the Supreme Court of Nigeria on autonomy of the local government particularly financial autonomy, does not expressly cede the powers of the Houses of Assembly to the local government and that of the legislative house.

    Read Also; Tinubu to Nigerians: 2025 is a very promising year

    “There are existing laws for local government administration across the country enacted by the state Houses of Assembly, whose powers to make such laws derive from the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

    “Edo State Local Government Law was enacted in the year 2000, in exercise of the powers vested in the House of Assembly as expressly stated in the 1999 Constitution.

    “Therefore, in the discharge of their responsibilities, local governments are guided by the relevant provisions of such law.

    “In line with the provisions of Section 20 of the Edo State Local Government Act and other provisions, the governor, in consultation with the House of Assembly expressed concerns over the untoward activities of the Chairmen and reported same to the House.

    “In the exercise of the powers vested in the Assembly, as contained in the Local Government Act 2000, (as amended), the Assembly subjected the issue to debate at its plenary, and a majority vote supported the suspension of the local government chairmen for two months in line with the provisions of the law whilst allowing the Speaker of the Legislative House in the councils to take over in acting capacity,” Afegbua said.

    ALGON kicks

    The affected chairmen kicked against their suspension, describing it as a “nullity” and a violation of court orders.

    The Executive Chairman of Orhionmwon LGA and Chairman of the Edo State chapter of the Association of Local Governments of Nigeria (ALGON), Newman Ugiagbe, dismissed the suspension as unconstitutional.

    Ugiagbe said: “This suspension is a brazen disobedience to the Constitution.

    “When a Chairman of a Local Government is accused of misconduct, it is the Councilors that are empowered by law to remove them from office by way of impeachment and not the State Assembly or governor.

    “Unfortunately, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)-dominated State Assembly that was supposed to resist the action of the Edo State governor, rubber-stamped the illegality.

    “In order to ensure that the chairmen do not return to their seats, they have been invited by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for possible corruption allegations and charges.”

    AGF’s intervention

    Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) faulted the decision by the Edo State’s Assembly.

    Fagbemi said: “One thing that I know and can say without fear is that under the present dispensation, the governor has no right to remove any local government chairman. That much I know.

    “If I did not know before, since July 11, 2024, I became aware of it that the removal of any Local Government Chairman or official would be the prerogative of that Local Government, through their legislative house.”

    What the Supreme Court said

    The Supreme Court, in its judgment delivered on July 11, which the AGF referenced, among others, granted financial autonomy to LGAs, held that the third level of government must be run by elected officials and stipulated how such officials could be validly removed from office.

    Specifically, the apex court issued a declaration that “the 36 states of Nigeria, acting through their respective governors and or Houses of Assembly, cannot, using state’s power, derivable from laws enacted by the State House of Assembly (anyhow so-called) lawfully dissolve democratically elected Local Government Councils within the said states.”

    The judgment was on the suit, marked: SC/CV/343/2024 filed by the AGF against the 36 states’ Attoneys-General.

    Court intervenes

    The affected council officials got a reprieve on December 20 when a High Court in Benin, Edo State, ordered a return to the status quo that existed before the suspension.

    Justice Efe Ikponwonba, in a ruling, issued an order of mandamus directing parties to maintain status quo ante belum as of December 12 when the case was filed, pending the hearing and determination of a motion on notice that has already been filed.

    Justice Ikponwonba issued the order in a suit filed by 18 local government council and ALGON in Edo State, with the Edo State Government, Edo State Governor, the Deputy Governor, the Attorney-General, the Accountant General and the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Local Government, Community and Chieftaincy Affairs listed as defendants.

    The judge restrained the defendants from giving effect to the House of Assembly resolution of December 16, 2024, purporting to suspend the Chairmen.

    Lawyers’ perspectives

    It seems the controversy thrown up by this development would only be effectively addressed by the court.

    This is because law experts appear not to agree on the constitutionality or otherwise of the suspension.

    While the AGF, Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN) and Otunba Tunde Falola described the suspension as unlawful, Reverend John Baiyeshea (SAN) and Kingsley Chikezie thought otherwise.

    Kehinde said he found no fault in the position as well explained by the AGF.

    Falola noted that Section 7(1) of the 1999 Constitution places obligations on every state of the federation to ensure the existence of the local government system throughout the Federation.

    He added that the House of Assembly of each state, in the exercise of the power granted in Section 7(1) of the Constitution, usually enacts such law that will provide for the establishment, structure, composition, finance and functions of such local government councils in their respective state.

    Falola said: “The foregoing formed the basis upon which every state exercises its right to conduct local government election in their respective state.

    “However, it must be noted that once an election is conducted into the local government council and a winner emerges, each elected council chairman naturally enjoys his autonomy as constitutionally guaranteed under the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to the extent that no state governor or state House of Assembly has the right to remove and or suspend such council Chairman under our law.

    “In other words, a council chairman in Nigeria cannot be removed or suspended by any state governor or state House of Assembly, being a democratically elected public officer.

    “It is only the legislative arm of each of the Local Government that can remove or suspend a council Chairman once an impeachable offence is established and the necessary procedure followed.

    “Flowing from the above, therefore, the resolution of the Edo State House of Assembly purporting to suspend Local Government Chairmen in the state is unconditional, null and void and of no effect howsoever.

    “The 1999 Constitution (as amended) does not give such power to any state House of Assembly. Such power as it were in this case, to say the least, is arbitrary and unconstitutional.

    “The law is settled that where the law provides for the doing of an act or taking of a step in a particular manner or way, any step or act done in violation of the statute is null and void and of no effect howsoever.

    “The apex Court in the celebrated case of INEC VS MUSA ( 2003) 3 NWLR ( Pt 806) 72@157 succinctly captures the position of the law when their Lordships of the apex Court held that ‘the legislative powers of the legislature cannot be exercised inconsistent with the Constitution.’

    “Flowing from the above, it is my humble view that it is the local government legislative arm and not the State House of Assembly that has the power to suspend or remove/ sack Local Government Chairmen in Nigeria,” Falola said.

    However, Baiyeshea took a separate view, arguing that although local governments are autonomous and held to be so by the Supreme Court in the celebrated judgment, the autonomy cannot be absolute.

    He noted that just like state governments and governors are subject to oversight checks and balances by the House of Assembly and the Judiciary, the local governments are similarly subject to checks and balances, particularly the Houses of Assembly.

    Baiyeshea added: “One unique feature of this matter in Edo State is the fact that the governor complained to the House of Assembly, which passed the resolution to suspend the Local Government Chairmen.

    “Let us not forget that the House of Assembly has the majority of members in PDP, the same party controlling virtually all the local governments in the state.

    “So, are we to say that the House of Assembly members did not know what they were doing when they passed the resolution to suspend the Local Government Chairmen?

    “Sure, they fully appreciate the implications of what they did.

    ‘‘To me, this is an interplay of politics and law coming together to deal with a peculiar situation out of necessity and expediency.

    “As far as I also know, local governments are creations of both the Constitution and laws made by the House of Assembly.

    “In fact, it is the laws made by Houses of Assembly that regulate the control and management of local governments.

    “In the previous situations, local government councils used to be dissolved by fiat or direct proclamation of governors as executive acts.

    “But the Governor of Edo State, in this instance, played a smart card by getting the House of Assembly to do it by resolution.

    “As a lawyer of many years standing, I will refrain from making a definitive pronouncement to say whether the resolution passed by Edo State House of Assembly to suspend the Local Government council is lawful or unlawful. That is the job of the courts.

    “Aggrieved parties will, therefore, do well to ventilate their grievances in the courts where all the relevant laws, rules and regulations will be examined to determine the correctness or otherwise of what the House of Assembly did.

    “Finally, situations evolve at all times and law is available to deal with such emerging facts and situations.

    “The emerging situation here is that the act of suspension of the chairmen in Edo State is that of the House of Assembly.

    Baiyeshea suggested that the court, with the appropriate jurisdiction, be allowed to put things right in checking the excesses of the Executive and Legislature should there be the need.

    He added: “It is not right for people to pass judgment which is the duty of the courts to do.”

    Chikezie argued that it is impossible to assume that leaders at the local government level could not be subjected to some level of control by the state Assembly when it is the same House of Assembly that enacts laws governing the activities of such councils.

  • Wanted: National minimum standard to reform criminal justice system

    Wanted: National minimum standard to reform criminal justice system

     Stakeholders have emphasised the urgent need for robust implementation of the National Minimum Standards (NMS) to strengthen the criminal justice system.                       

    The experts underscored the importance of ensuring compliance with the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) and state Administration of Criminal Justice Laws (ACJLs) to address delays, overcrowding in correctional facilities, and ineffective case management.

    They spoke at a two-day capacity-building workshop on “National Minimum Standards                    for effective Implications of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 & The Administration of Criminal Justice Law of Lagos State.”

    Organised by the  Centre for Socio-Legal Studies (CSLS), with the support of  The Rule of Law & Anti-Corruption (RoLAC) Programme, it was held in Lagos.

    The workshop brought together legal professionals, government officials, and civil society advocates to evaluate the progress of the ACJA and proffer solutions for improved delivery of justice.

    Prof. Yemi Akinseye-George (SAN), a leading legal scholar, highlighted the significant improvements in criminal justice since the passage of the ACJA.

    He pointed to the enforcement of Section 306, which limits delays through interlocutory appeals, as a game-changer.

    “The strict application of this provision has reduced abuses, leading to faster trials and increased recovery of stolen assets,” he said.

    Prof. Akinseye-George also announced the development of a National Scoresheet to evaluate states’ implementation of the ACJ legislation.

     “Delta State currently leads, while Ebonyi and Zamfara are at the bottom. This ranking will encourage states to compete and improve their systems,” he noted.

    Addressing pressing issues, the Senior Advocate lauded recent proposals for a fixed five-year tenure for heads of courts to enhance accountability and promote leadership opportunities among judges.

     He also praised efforts by anti-graft agencies like the EFCC and ICPC in public education campaigns but urged them to adopt more robust preventative strategies.

    Read Also: Tinubu to Nigerians: 2025 is a very promising year

    On judicial welfare, Akinseye-George commended the Minister of the FCT, Nyesom Wike, for providing befitting accommodation for judges, stressing the need for similar efforts nationwide.

    He further called for an end to the “barbaric” practice of manual recording of court proceedings, urging the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) to enforce deadlines for e-filing, e-service, and e-recording to accelerate case resolution.

    The Director of Community Service at the Lagos State Ministry of Justice, Tomi Bodude, outlined key challenges in the justice system, including poor investigations, weak prosecution, case delays, and severe overcrowding in correctional facilities, particularly with pre-trial detainees and children.

     “The prolonged delays send a dangerous signal that criminal behaviour goes unpunished, encouraging corruption, banditry, and kidnapping,” she said.

    Bodude highlighted the role of the NMS project, a collaboration between ministries of justice, civil society, and development partners, in creating a standardised benchmark for assessing criminal justice reforms.

    “This framework promotes healthy competition and provides measurable performance indicators for states,” she added.

    The Programme Officer at the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies (CSLS), Kelvin Mejulu, emphasised reforms at the pre-trial and trial stages.

    He advocated for pre-trial case management hearings to ensure timely trials, witness support, and diversion programmes for children in conflict with the law.

    Mejulu called for strict adherence to timelines, including the issuance of legal advice within 14 days and reassignment of cases to new judges within two weeks.

    Mejulu also stressed the need for electronic means of serving court charges and the establishment of a Bail Information Management System (BIMS) to streamline bail processes and prevent gender discrimination against sureties.

     “No child should be remanded in adult facilities, and correctional centres must address the needs of female inmates, including pregnant women and nursing mothers,” he stated.

    The workshop also addressed the trial stage, advocating for defendants to disclose their defence within 14 days after the prosecution’s case closes and for legal representation referrals within 30 days for unrepresented defendants.

     Trial in absentia was recommended for absconding defendants to ensure cases are not stalled.

    Participants further urged the Attorney-General of the Federation and state AGs to deploy case tracking systems and establish victims’ compensation funds.

     In cases where convicts are unable to pay compensation, they proposed alternative punishments like community service or agricultural work to benefit the government or private entities.

    The cross-cutting themes emphasised the need for early engagement between investigators and prosecutors in serious offences, sentencing guidelines favouring alternatives for minor offenders, and improved reporting and capacity-building efforts.

    The workshop consensus that the National Minimum Standards offer a practical framework to transform Nigeria’s criminal justice system by fostering efficiency, reducing delays, and ensuring fair treatment for all parties involved.

  • Ex-bank manager jailed for $46,900 fraud

    Ex-bank manager jailed for $46,900 fraud

    A former bank manager, Fidelis Egueke, has been convicted and sentenced to six months in prison by an Asaba, Delta State Chief Magistrate’s Court for defrauding a victim of $46,900.

    Chief Magistrate Callistus Isioma Moeteke found Egueke guilty of a single charge brought against him by the police under case number CMA/295c/2024.

    Prosecutor, Raphael Eze, of the State Criminal Investigation Department (SCID), Asaba, said Egueke, a former Asaba branch manager of a tier-one bank, fraudulently obtained $46,900 by using two Certificates of Occupancy (CofOs) as collateral.

    One of the land titles, however, was not his, and the other was fake.

    After receiving the money, Egueke used it for personal expenses and failed to repay the victim as promised.

    The prosecution argued that Egueke’s actions violated Section 419 of the Criminal Code Law, Cap C21, Vol.1 Laws of Delta State, Nigeria, 2006.

    Read Also: Yusuf reinstates routine immunisation in Kano

    Despite denying the offence, Egueke failed to present evidence of repayment during the trial.

    Chief Magistrate Moeteke determined that the prosecution had proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Egueke was convicted and sentenced to six months imprisonment.

    However, the court also gave him the option to pay a fine of N350,000 in lieu of serving the prison term.

    The court ordered Egueke to pay N30 million in restitution to the victim within six months of his conviction.

    The charge against Egueke stated that, in 2016, he fraudulently obtained a credit facility worth $46,900 (approximately N60 million) from Chief Jude Ndudi by presenting false documents, including land titles that did not belong to him, in violation of Section 419 of the Criminal Code Law.

    Egueke is also facing trial before a Lagos Federal High Court on charges related to a separate fraud case involving N179.498 million.

    He is being prosecuted by the Force Criminal Investigation Department (ForceCID), Annex Alagbon-Ikoyi, Lagos.

  • ICPC cautions lawyers over petitions against anti-corruption agencies

    ICPC cautions lawyers over petitions against anti-corruption agencies

    The Chairman of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), Dr. Musa Adamu Aliyu, SAN, has cautioned members of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) over writing unnecessary and frivolous petitions against anti-corruption agencies and judges in the course of litigations.

    The ICPC Boss issued the caution when he  hosted the Chairman and members of National Litigation Committee (NLT) of the NBA, at the Commission’s Headquarters in Abuja.

    According to Dr. Aliyu, “writing unnecessary petitions against officers of the Commission and Judges without concrete justification is not proper, as we are all colleagues and partners in the fight against corruption.”

    He advised  that appropriate professional measures should be explored in resolving issues arising between lawyers and anti-corruption officers in the course of investigations and litigations.

    The Chairman pointed out that, writing frivolous petitions against Judges and officers involved in the fight against corruption does not help matters, noting “it does not encourage those who are working so hard to rid Nigeria of corruption.”

    Read Also: Yuletide: First Lady donates 1,000 bags of rice to Bauchi Christian community

    He said: “In ICPC, there is no harassment of lawyers. We ensure that the rights of lawyers are protected, so also the rights of our officers in the cause of their duties”.

    He advised the NBA not to hesitate to draw the attention of the Commission whenever there are concerns, as ICPC is committed to looking into such issues objectively and addressing them accordingly.

    “We at ICPC, we try our best to see that we protect the rights of suspects and their lawyers. Since I came in here as the Chairman, I have not received any complaint of lawyers being harassed by the officers of the Commission” he stated.

    He added that ICPC encourages mutual, professional respect and understanding in line with the law and called on the lawyers to extend the same courtesy to the officers whenever they have anything to do with the Commission.

    Earlier, the Chairman of the Committee, Vincent Otaokpokpu, informed the Chairman that they were at the Commission’s Headquarters to brief him on the responsibilities of the Committee as contained in their Terms of Reference issued by the NBA.

    He told his host that the Committee was the first to be inaugurated by the current leadership of the NBA to protect the rights of the lawyers while doing their jobs.

     He said that ICPC in its fight against corruption will have causes to interface with lawyers hence, they considered the Commission a critical partner in ensuring that the rights of their members are protected.

    Mr. Otaokpokpu stated that “the committee was inaugurated and charged with the responsibilities of advocating for the rights of lawyers, assist in the promotion of interest of lawyers, assist in the defense of lawyers who are subjected to one form of humiliation, harassment or the other by law enforcement agents”.

    He told the chairman that the Committee seeks to collaborate with the Commission on how to join forces against corruption, while protecting the interest and rights of their members.

    He however, noted that the Committee was not unaware of the challenges ICPC might be facing in terms of relating with the lawyers of corruption suspects, as some of them may tend to be over zealous in trying to defend their clients.

    The Committee then pledged to assist in educating lawyers on how they can better protect the integrity of the Bar and promote the Rule of Law, revealing that the Committee was ready to collaborate with the ICPC even in litigation matters.

    The ICPC Chairman seized the opportunity to encourage all lawyers to take Anti-money laundering issues seriously as they are contained in the NBA profession guidelines.

  • Family petitions LAHA over property dispute with council chairman

    Family petitions LAHA over property dispute with council chairman

    Tunji Olaleye family have petitioned the Lagos State House of Assembly (LAHA), urging it to intervene in a dispute over their property located at Plots 7 and 8, Ogba Road, Sowonola Street, Agege, Lagos.

    The Olaleyes, through their lawyer, Edmund Amadi of Edmund Amadi & Associates, Legal Practitioners & Corporate Consultants, in the petition addressed to the Speaker of the House,  Mudashiru Obasa, alleged that the Executive Chairman of Agege Local Government, Alhaji Ganiyu Egunjobi, has unlawfully dispossessed them of their property, despite a High Court judgment  delivered on 22nd April 2013 in their favour.

    According  to the petitioners, a Lagos State High  court sometime in August 2022  gave possession of the property to the family.

    It was alleged that  the Chairman had disregarded the court’s decision and  initiated an illegal construction project on the property.

    This action, they claim, is in direct violation of the court order, which instructed the marketers previously occupying the property to vacate and relocate to allow the rightful owners  take possession.

    Read Also: Yusuf reinstates routine immunisation in Kano

    The petitioners expressed deep concern over the continued defiance to the order of the court, pointing out that Alhaji Egunjobi used his position and authority to disrupt their lawful ownership and possession of the property.

    They describe the Chairman’s actions as an abuse of power and a threat to justice and property rights.

    The petitioner, Olaleye and his family, through their lawyer,  appealled to the Lagos State House of Assembly to intervene urgently in the matter.

    They prayed  the Assembly to ensure the enforcement of the court judgment  delivered  April 22, 2013 in their favour and halt any further illegal construction on their property by the Agege Local Government or its agents.

    The petitioners warned that failure to address this issue could lead to further tension and conflict.

    They urged the Speaker and the Lagos State House of Assembly to uphold the rule of law and ensure that  justice is served in the matter.

    This petition noted that  the persistent struggle of individuals to assert their legal rights in the face of alleged government interference, calling attention to the critical need for accountability and adherence to judicial rulings.

    When contacted, the  Chairman Agege Local Government, Alhaji Ganiyu Egunjobi told The Nation that he was not in dispute with anybody over landed property.

    “I am aware of the dispute between Agege Local Government and some people and the matter is pending in court.

    “Aside from this, I don’t want to make any comment because that is prejudice to the matter in court”, he said.

  • Global energy transition must reflect local realities, say law experts

    Global energy transition must reflect local realities, say law experts

    International law and sustainability experts have called for clean energy transition policies that reflect local realities in developing countries.

    They highlighted the need for international solidarity and cooperation to ensure that the energy transition does not exacerbate energy poverty.

    This recommendation was made at the 2024 International Conference on Environmental Law and Governance for Sustainable Development convened by the Green Institute, in collaboration with Institute for Oil, Gas, Energy, Environment and Sustainable Development (OGEES Institute) at Afe Babalola University, Ado Ekiti, and the International Law Association, Nigerian Branch.

    The conference featured scholars from New Zealand, Canada, South Africa, Mexico, Colombia, United Kingdom and Nigeria.

    The focus was on the formal public presentation of the book titled, Net Zero and Natural Resources Law, published by Oxford University Press. 

    The 400-page book highlights the latest developments in natural resources law and policy in light of ongoing worldwide efforts to achieve the clean energy transition. 

    The conference opened with a compelling address by the lead editor of the book, Prof. Damilola Olawuyi (SAN), who is also the Chair of the Academic Advisory Group of the International Bar Association’s energy section (SEERIL). 

    The international energy law expert highlighted that the ongoing drive for clean energy transition raises a wide range of legal, contractual and foreign diplomacy questions that must be carefully analysed and balanced, to ensure that the transition leaves no one behind.

     “This book fills a significant gap in the clean energy transition discourse.

    Read Also: BREAKING: Tinubu to engage Nigerians in first presidential media chat tonight

    “With case studies from Africa, Asia, Middle East, Europe, Australasia, and North and South America, it provides a balanced assessment of how legal and regulatory systems are responding, and can better respond, to the fundamental challenges and risks in the clean energy transition.

    “ It offers practical solutions that will be very useful for countries like Nigeria as we seek to balance global imperatives with local realities.” Prof. Olawuyi stated.

    During panel discussions, moderated by Dr. Adenike Akinsemolu and Prof. Walters Nsoh, explored integrated policy approaches for achieving a just, inclusive and orderly transition.

     Expert contributors and speakers including Professor Barry Barton, Professor Hanri Mostert, Professor Nadia B. Ahmad, Prof. José Juan González, Dr. Milton Fernando Montoya, Dr. Hugo Meyer van den Berg, Mehrnoosh Aryanpour, and Elena Athwal, offered insights on the evolving principles of natural resource law in a net zero era, critical mineral strategies for clean energy technologies, including the opportunities for promoting sustainable hydrogen investments in Africa.

    The  interactive discussion session also provided actionable insights for practitioners and stakeholders. In her closing remarks, Dr. Adenike Akinsemolu reflected on the critical themes of the conference, emphasising collaboration and innovation.

    She remarked, “The future of natural resources governance depends on our ability to innovate, collaborate, and remain steadfast in our commitment to sustainability and equity.

    ‘‘This conference has provided a pivotal and international platform for dialogue, showcasing the intersection of law, policy, and innovation in achieving global sustainability goals.” She said

  • Impact of blockchain tech in revolutionising legal systems

    Impact of blockchain tech in revolutionising legal systems

    By Tochukwu Onyiuke (SAN) and Oge Anene

    Blockchain technology is bringing a new level of transparency, security, and efficiency to legal processes.

    As investors and regulators explore its potential, blockchain is no longer just a tool for financial transactions.

    It is now paving the way for more accessible, trustworthy, and streamlined legal practices.

    With the increasing digitalisation of global systems, legal professionals must adapt to these changes to remain relevant and effective.

    Although blockchain is often associated with cryptocurrencies, its influence extends far beyond finance, transforming sectors such as law, where it is reshaping the way contracts, property records, and evidence are managed.

    This secure, digital tool is transforming how legal systems handle contracts, property records, and even evidence.

    For legal professionals, understanding blockchain’s potential is essential, not only for advising clients but also for adapting to a future where blockchain could become a core part of legal practice.

    Understanding Blockchain

    Blockchain is essentially a digital record securely shared across multiple computers. This distributed ledger technology links records known as “blocks” in a chain that can’t be altered, making it ideal for tracking legal transactions.

    Because it’s transparent and secure, blockchain has the potential to transform legal processes, from how agreements are made to how compliance is managed.

    Key Applications of Blockchain in Legal Systems

    1. Smart Contracts: Simplifying Agreements

    One of the most promising applications of blockchain in law is the use of smart contracts. These are self-executing contracts where terms are embedded directly into code.

    Smart contracts enforce themselves automatically when certain conditions are met, cutting out the need for intermediaries and reducing disputes.

    For example, in decentralised finance (DeFi), smart contracts facilitate automatic payment transfers upon loan repayments or insurance claim approvals. Beyond DeFi, blockchain enables automation in supply chain agreements, where payment is released to suppliers upon delivery verification through sensors and GPS data recorded on the blockchain.

    Similarly, insurance policies can be automated, ensuring prompt payouts based on predefined conditions, such as weather data or flight delays.

    Intellectual Property and Land Registry: Protecting Ownership

    Blockchain’s secure, unchangeable nature makes it a valuable tool for managing intellectual property rights and land registries.

    By recording ownership and transaction history on a blockchain, legal systems can ensure the authenticity and traceability of assets, reducing fraud and disputes.

    For instance, Dubai’s land registry system uses blockchain to streamline property transactions. This allows buyers and sellers to securely verify property ownership and transaction history, making the process more transparent and reducing the chance of disputes.

    Similarly, artists and creators can register their works on a blockchain, establishing irrefutable proof of ownership and facilitating licensing agreements.

    This could revolutionise copyright protection, ensuring creators receive proper attribution and royalties for their work.

    Chain of Custody and Litigation: Securing Evidence

    Read Also: Yuletide: First Lady donates 1,000 bags of rice to Bauchi Christian community

    In legal proceedings, maintaining the chain of custody is critical to preserving the integrity of evidence. It involves a clear and documented record of every interaction with evidence, tracing its source, handling, and transfer.

    Any gaps or inconsistencies in this chain can jeopardise the admissibility of evidence, particularly in criminal cases where tampering could lead to wrongful outcomes.

    Section 84 of the Evidence Act emphasises the importance of ensuring the authenticity and reliability of electronic records.

    Blockchain offers a powerful solution to strengthen the chain of custody. Its decentralised and immutable ledger creates an unalterable record of every transaction, significantly reducing the risk of tampering or errors.

    By logging each transfer and handling stage in real time, blockchain enhances transparency and reliability, ensuring evidence can be confidently presented in court.

    In cybersecurity and digital forensics cases, blockchain can securely document the handling of digital evidence.

    For instance, in cases involving cyberattacks, blockchain systems can chronologically log when evidence—such as server logs or data packets—was collected, analysed, and transferred.

    The Financial Scope of Blockchain Technology and Cybercrime

    Blockchain technology has experienced exponential growth, underscoring its transformative potential across industries. In 2021, the global blockchain market was valued at approximately $4.5 billion, growing to $17.60 billion by 2023, and is projected to reach $1,879.30 billion by 2034, expanding at a CAGR of 52.9%.

    These figures demonstrate blockchain’s economic impact, positioning it as a pivotal force surpassing traditional industries like oil and gas.

    At the same time, cybercrime continues to inflict significant financial losses globally, with over $6 trillion lost in 2021 alone.

    Blockchain’s transparency, immutability, and decentralised nature present critical solutions to mitigate vulnerabilities, secure transactions, and safeguard economies.

    Blockchain’s Broader Impact on Legal Systems

    Blockchain’s integration into legal systems isn’t just about adopting a new technology; it’s about reimagining how justice is served in the digital age.

    By automating routine tasks and providing a transparent platform for transactions, blockchain allows legal professionals to focus on complex, strategic issues.

    For instance, decentralised platforms like Kleros use blockchain for arbitration services, providing more affordable dispute resolution mechanisms.

    Online legal clinics can also leverage blockchain to securely share documents and verify identities, reducing reliance on in-person meetings.

    These innovations demonstrate blockchain’s potential to make legal services more accessible, efficient, and trustworthy.

    Challenges and Considerations

    While blockchain holds great promises, its widespread adoption also presents challenges. Legal professionals and regulators must address issues surrounding regulatory compliance, data privacy, and the standardization of blockchain protocols.

    For instance, how do blockchain-based systems comply with data protection regulations like GDPR, especially when handling sensitive personal data?

    Furthermore, lawyers will require specialised training to effectively utilise and advise on blockchain-related legal matters.

    The legal industry is taking steps to address these challenges. In the U.S., some states have begun recognizing smart contracts as legally binding, but global acceptance varies.

    International cooperation is crucial to establish a universal legal framework for recognizing blockchain-based evidence and contracts across borders.

    This requires developing standardised protocols for data handling and identity verification, as well as ensuring interoperability between different blockchain systems.

    Addressing scalability is also vital, as some platforms may struggle to handle the large data volumes generated by legal processes.

    These efforts are essential for ensuring the seamless integration of blockchain technology into the global legal landscape.

    While these challenges are significant, they are not insurmountable. With continued innovation and collaboration among legal professionals, regulators, and technologists, blockchain can seamlessly integrate into legal systems, driving transformative change.

    Looking Ahead

    Blockchain technology is poised to revolutionise legal systems by introducing new levels of transparency, security, and efficiency.

    As the legal industry continues to explore blockchain’s potential, professionals who are familiar with this technology will not only adapt to the digital age but also help shape it.

    With real-world applications already underway, blockchain is quickly proving its value as an essential tool for the future of law.

    By embracing this technology and addressing its challenges, the legal profession can unlock new possibilities for delivering justice in a more accessible, efficient, and trustworthy manner.

    Legal professionals who are familiar with blockchain technology will be better equipped to navigate the evolving legal landscape and provide innovative solutions to their clients.

    By understanding the potential and limitations of blockchain, the legal industry can harness its power to redefine justice for the modern world.

    •              Onyiuke is a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and a Partner in Accendolaw Partners LP, Lagos. Anene is a Supervisory Associate Counsel in the firm with deep focus on digital assets.

  • Royal family urges court to nullify monarch’s installation

    Royal family urges court to nullify monarch’s installation

    The Olanwa Ruling House of Isheri-Olofin has prayed the Lagos State High Court in Ikeja to set aside the purported installation of Ibrahim Olasunkanmi Bello as the oba-elect of the community.

    Head of the Olanwa Family, Alhaji Adebiyi Lamidi; Prince Moruf Adebiyi and Prince Lukeman Adebiyi, who sued for themselves and on behalf of the Olanwa Ruling House, stated that Bello was installed despite a subsisting court order.

    Through their lawyer Mr George Oguntade (SAN), the plaintiffs had filed a motion asking the court to restrain the first defendant as the Oba Elect of Isheri Olofin.

    The motion was argued on November 22 and a ruling was to be delivered on December 11

    According to the claimants, Bello was installed as the oba on the same day the court ruled to uphold the plaintiffs’ motion and restrained him from parading himself as Oba Elect.

    The plaintiffs have filed a motion to set aside the purported installation and are in the process of commencing contempt proceedings against the first defendant.

    Other defendants in the suit are the Balogun of Isheri-Olofin, Chief Fasasi Balogun; the Eletu of Isheri-Olofin, Chief Saheed Adebiyi; the Otun of Isheri-Olofin, Chief Kolawole Ogundeyi; the Osi of Isheri-Olofin, Chief Idowu Erinfolami; the Ajiroba of Isheri-Olofin, Chief Lateet Ilyas Abogunloko; and the Iyaolode of Isheri-Olofin, Chief Ekundayo Abogunloko.

    The rest are the Ajigbeda of Isheri-Olofin, Chief Simbiat Abogunloko; the Aro of Isheri-Olofin, Chief Wasiu Ogundeyi; Chairman Egbe Idimu Local Council Development Area, Alimosho; the Chieftaincy Committee of Alimosho Local Government; the Lagos State Ministry of Local Government, Chieftaincy and Community Affairs and the Governor of Lagos State.

    The plaintiffs are praying for “a restorative order setting aside the purported installation of the first defendant as the new Oba of Isheri-Olofin at a ceremony which took place at the Alimosho Local Government Secretariat on the 11th day of December 2024”.

    They seek an order restraining the 12th and 13th defendants (chieftaincy ministry and the governor) “from affording any credence or recognition whatsoever to the purported installation of the first defendant as the new Oba of Isheri-Olofin pending the hearing and determination of this suit”.

    They asked for “an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the first defendant from performing the duties and responsibilities of Oba of Isheri-Olofin pending the hearing and determination of this suit”.

    Read Also: Tinubu to Nigerians: 2025 is a very promising year

    They also pray the court for an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the state government from presenting the Staff of Office of Oba of Isheri-Olofin to the first defendant and restraining him from receiving the same pending the hearing and determination of the suit.

    The motion is supported by an affidavit deposed to by Chief Lamidi, Head of the Claimant’s Royal Family which is one of the four Ruling Houses of Isheri-Olofin, whose turn it is to fill the vacant Obaship Stool of Isheri-Olofin under the extant Isheri-Olofin Chieftaincy Declaration dated  June 1, 1983.

    According to him, the last Oba of Isheri-Olofin was Oba Wahab Ayinde Balogun [Olofin V] who hailed from the Olaigbo Ruling House and ruled for over 35 years until he joined his ancestors on February 8, 2022, aged 95.

    Following his demise, the families of Isheri-Olofin wrote to the Commissioner for Local Government on June 6, 2022, to introduce Prince Bilaminu Kola Balogun as the Regent of Isheri Olofin.

    In response, the ministry, through the Chairman of the Egbe-Idimu LCDA, wrote to unanimously approve the appointment of Prince Ola Balogun as Regent of Isheri-Olofin vide a September 27, 2022 letter.

    Following rival claims to the vacant Obaship Stool of Isheri-Olofin, the claimants submitted the dispute to court on July 25, 2024, and served the processes on all the defendants.

    The claimants also filed a Motion on Notice for Interlocutory Injunction seeking a number of injunctive reliefs, including restraining the first defendant from parading himself as the Oba Elect of Isheri-Olofin.

    The motion was argued on November 22, 2024, with most of the defendants represented, and a ruling was delivered on December 11, 2024, restraining the first defendant.

    According to the claimants, while the order for injunction was pending, the first to 12th defendants “contemptuously proceeded to plan and organise an Installation ceremony”, which took place on December 11, the same day the court restrained the first defendant from parading himself as the Oba of Isheri-Olofin.

    The claimants stated that by proceeding to hold the installation ceremony despite the pendency of the suit and the ruling, the defendants “clearly attempted to steal a match on the claimants and thereby foist a fait accompli on the court”.

    The deponent stated that the ministry was yet to approve the first defendant’s appointment as the Oba of Isheri-Olofin and has not presented the staff of office to him in recognition of that appointment.

    The plaintiffs urged the court to invoke its disciplinary jurisdiction aimed at preserving its dignity and majesty by reversing the action taken by the first to 12th defendants to preserve the res and restore the status quo ante bellum irrespective of the merits of the case, the first to 12th defendants having acted contemptuously.

    They noted that the need to preserve the res – the Isheri-Olofin Obashi Stool – necessitates the grant to prayers to set aside the purported installation, among others.

  • Plea bargain not rooted in Nigerian laws

    Plea bargain not rooted in Nigerian laws

    Although the concept of the plea bargain option has become popular in Nigeria in recent years, a report by Tope Adebayo LP, a leading law firm based in Lagos State, has stated that plea bargain is not rooted in Nigerian laws.

    According to the report titled “The Legality of The Use of Plea Bargain in Nigeria’s Criminal Justice System”, plea bargain, a situation or arrangement in which a defendant pleads guilty to a lesser charge or forfeits funds or property(ies) to the prosecution, only has legal backing in Lagos State.

    “Plea bargaining is an invention of the American legal process. It started by convention but having been accepted by the courts, it is now entrenched in their federal and state criminal procedure rules, with the State of California even providing a seven-page form to guide the prosecution and defence in the formulation of their agreements.

    “The Black’s Law Dictionary, gives the definition of plea bargain as: a negotiated agreement between a prosecutor and a criminal defendant whereby the defendant pleads guilty to a lesser offence or to one of multiple charges in exchange for some concession by the prosecutor, usually, a more lenient sentence or a dismissal of the charges,” the report by Tope Adebayo LP stated.

    Having been deployed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in many cases of alleged corruption by public officials and others holding offices in Nigeria, plea bargain has always been a controversial topic, with the groundswell of opposition stemming from it only applying to the rich and powerful.

    The report recounted that  it was first used by the EFCC in 2005 to settle the corruption case against former Inspector-General of Police, Tafa Balogun and in the same year for the embezzlement case involving now late former Bayelsa State governor, Diepreye Alamieyesagha as well as Emmanuel Nwude and Nzeribe Okoli who allegedly defrauded a Brazilian bank.

    Read Also: Uba Sani attends Christmas carol, preaches peace

    Other cases of large-scale corruption in which which plea bargain has been applied include those involving former Edo State governor, Lucky Igbinedion in 2008 and that of Mrs. Cecilia Ibru, the former CEO of Oceanic Bank.Former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Honourable Justice Dahiru Musdapher, is one of those who have argued that plea bargain is illegal in Nigeria.

    Although his statement at the time was countered by the Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), Dr Chidi Anslem Odinkalu, former Chairman of the Abuja Chapter of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Mazi Osigwe as well as the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, Mr. Ibrahim Lamorde, those counter arguments were more on the advantages than legality of the concept.

    The report goes further: “Therefore, in view of the fact that plea bargain agreements do not meet the legal test required by S.135 of the Evidence Act and in fact, can sometimes be employed in a manner that could breach a fundamental right, a case can be made against the legality of the practice.

    The statutory provisions which have been used as justification for plea bargain include S.180 (1) CPA, S.14 (2), EFCC Act and S.174 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).

    “However, it is evident that the contents of these provisions are really conceived by those who invoke them, in an implied sense and by virtue of inherent powers and meanings.

    “The only piece of legislation in the country at present that contains the phrase ‘plea bargain’, with circumstances and rules on how to implement the practice is the Administration of Criminal Justice Law (2007) of Lagos State.”

  • The law on same-sex marriage

    The law on same-sex marriage

    By Ben Ijeoma Adigwe

    The traditional concept of marriage is between a man and a woman.

    Marriage was defined by  Lord Penzance as “the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.”

    Our interpretation Act defines a monogamous marriage as a marriage which is recognised by the law of the place where it is contracted, as a voluntary union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others during the continuance of the marriage. 

    Islamic or Sharia law advocates marriages between a man and a woman prescribing death by stoning for persons found guilty of homosexuality.

    When Jesus was asked of marriage he spoke of marriage being that of a man and his wife.

    He referred to Moses’ account of the first marriage in Eden saying: “For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh.” (Matthew 19:5 and Mark 10:7).

    African traditional religion has no place for homosexuality.

    But the traditional definition of marriage as one between two persons of the opposite sexes has been challenged in modern times so much that in some countries like Canada, civil marriage is now defined as   “a union between two people”.

    This challenge is a result of certain countries giving recognition to same-sex marriages.

    The countries which have recognised it include England, Canada, and South Africa. South Africa was the first African country to so do.

    Denmark took the first shot in recognising same-sex marriage when in 1989 it recognised partnership between same-sex couples.

    In 2000 the Netherlands became the first country to legalise same-sex marriage.

    Belgium did in 2003, Spain in 2005, Canada in 2005, South Africa in 2006, and Norway in 2008.

    Read Also: Tinubu to Nigerians: 2025 is a very promising year

    When sexual desire is directed at members of one’s own sex, homosexuality is said to have come into place.

    The proponents of same-sex marriage argue that the right to freedom of association guaranteed by the constitution and other international human rights instruments directly translates to entitlement to relate, cohabit or marry.

    They claim that homosexuality is genetically encoded in some people’s DNA and so they should not be discriminated against.

    In Nigeria, under the criminal and penal codes, homosexuality was already unlawful and criminalised.

    On January 7,  2014, the then-president of Nigeria, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan signed into law the same-sex (prohibition ) Act of Nigeria 2013.

    The act prohibits a marriage contract or civil union between persons of the same sex.

    Also, a same-sex marriage contract or civil union entered outside Nigeria is void in Nigeria and unenforceable.

    The act prohibits the solemnisation of such marriage in a church, mosque or any place of worship in Nigeria.

    No same-sex certificate of marriage or civil union is valid in Nigeria. The law recognises a valid marriage in Nigeria as that contracted only between a man and a woman.

    The act also prohibits the registration, sustenance, procession, and meetings of gay clubs, societies and organisations.

    Under the law, public show of an amorous relationship directly or indirectly by members of the same sex is prohibited.

    A 14-year jail term awaits anyone who enters a same-sex marriage contract or civil union under the law.

    A 10-year jail term awaits anyone who has anything to do with a gay club or who directly or indirectly displays same-sex amorous relationships in Nigeria.

    Also under the act, any person who administers, witnesses, aids or abets the solemnisation of a same-sex marriage or civil union or supports the existence of a gay club or society, procession, or meeting is liable to 10 years imprisonment if found guilty.

    The High courts of the states and of the Federal Capital Territory are empowered with Jurisdiction over matters under the act.

    As was stated above, African Native law and custom abhor homosexuality.

    But there is a custom prevalent in some parts of Nigeria which can be caught by the web of the same-sex prohibition Law.

    Under this custom, a woman who cannot bear children can “marry” another prolific woman to bear kids for her.

    Under this arrangement, a man comes to sleep with the prolific woman with the understanding that the kids which result from this arrangement belong to the woman who married the prolific woman.

    In Odigie v. Aika (suit no. 4/24A/79, unreported judgment, Ubiaja Judicial Division, Edo State on March 23, 1982), Hon. Justice Ohiwerei held that the Ishan custom, whereby a childless woman can marry another woman to bear issues for her is regarded as being repugnant to natural justice, equity and good conscience and therefore unenforceable.

    I am aware that these “marriages” are still contracted to date. It is submitted that this is a same-sex marriage under the Same-Sex Marriage (Prohibition) Act 2013.

    This is more so as Section 7 of the Act expressly mentions customary marriages as being in contemplation.

    •Read more about Adigwe, a lawyer, poet, chartered mediator/conciliator and author, at benadigwe.com