LEGISLATIVE POWERS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY IS ITEMISED IN THE EXCLUSIVE LIST

THEORY OF THE RULE OF LAW VIS-A-VIS CUSTOMARY LAW – PECULIARITY OF NIGERIAN SITUATION

The theory of the rule of law which is now commonly canvassed and resorted to by politicians, journalists, and even lawyers to describe innominate situations seems to me much wider than the formulation of the Rule by Dicey in the late 18th century. It is different from the rule familiar to Constitutional lawyers. The principles in the rule as stated by Dicey are three. The first is the absolute supremacy of law as opposed to the exercise of arbitrary power. The second is the equality of all persons before the law. The third is that the constitution is the result of the ordinary law of the land as interpreted by the courts. It is important to bear in mind that Dicey formulated the rule of law with respect to the unwritten Constitution of England, and in relation to the nature and content of English law – common law and statutory. There is no doubt he had in mind the application of democratic principles of the Westminster style and the impartial enforcement of the laws of England. The rules enunciated by Dicey were formulated in contrast with the situation in foreign countries. Our circumstances in this country are not identical. They are peculiar. We have adopted English law as the general law. We did not abolish all our own laws and customs which govern our ways of life in many important respects. We have also adopted the principles of democracy as recognised in West European countries. Undoubtedly, these principles adopted must be applied with necessary modification and adaptation within the context of the laws adopted, recognised and applicable in our communities. Of course where any such laws are incompatible with our democratic values, they are by our Constitution to be rejected. Hence the Court of Appeal ought to have shown which of the rules of law or its variant is inconsistent with the custom being rejected. The custom applies uniformly only to defaulting members of the Age grade society. It is the law as accepted by them. It is, on the evidence, the law recognised by the community.

– Karibe-Whyte JSC. Agbai v. Okogbue (1991) – SC 104/1989

NON OBSERVANCE WITH RULE OF LAW IS A WASTE OF HUMAN RESOURCES

Ours is not a perfect society but our imperfections can be eradicated by our observance of the rule of law. Our human resources are our greatest asset and unless we use them to advantage, the Nigerian nation will be the loser. We cannot afford to lag behind while other nations march forward and enjoy the full benefit of their developed human resources. – Andrews Otutu Obaseki, JSC. Garba & Ors. v. The University Of Maiduguri (1986) 1 NWLR (Pt.18) 550

LAWS ARE MADE FOR MEN, NOT MEN FOR LAWS

Laws are made for men and not men for laws. The administration of justice involves the administration of the purest principles of law among men for the good of men in its fairest conception. Man is fallible, so are the thoughts of man. This fallible nature of man demands that whenever the errors of thoughts and thought processes surface and are exposed and brought to the attention of its authors, there should be power or jurisdiction to depart from the errors and tread the correct path.

— Obaseki, JSC. Odi v Osafile (1985) – SC.144/1983

SELF-HELP CANNOT OPERATE WHERE RULE OF LAW OPERATES

In the area where rule of law operates, the rule of self help by force is abandoned. Nigeria being one of the countries in the world even in the third world which proclaim loudly to follow the rule of law, there is no room for the rule of self help by force to operate. Once a dispute has arisen between a person and the government or authority and the dispute has been brought before the court, thereby invoking the judicial powers of the state. it is the duty of the government to allow the law to take its course or allow the legal and judicial process to run its full course.

– Obaseki, JSC. Military Governor v. Ojukwu (1986) – SC.241/1985