在尼日利亚制定基本权利行动:未解决的问题

C. Chijioke, Boma Geoffrey Toby
{"title":"在尼日利亚制定基本权利行动:未解决的问题","authors":"C. Chijioke, Boma Geoffrey Toby","doi":"10.20319/pijss.2020.63.5669","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Instituting fundamental Right actions has become one of the most popular forms of litigations in Nigeria; and for this credit must be given to the very liberal Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009 (FREP RULES) as against the FREP Rules, 1979 which is repealed. One cannot boldly say, without fear of contradiction that our courts are as proactive in their approach to some basic issues in fundamental rights litigation as the FREP Rules intends. This paper set out to re-visit the issue of jurisdiction in respect of fundamental rights litigations and required number of applicants permitted to institute to such actions; reviewing some authorities in the course and finally resolving that there is need for the apex court to finally distinguish between its decisions in Turkur v. Government of Gongola State (1988) All NLR 42 and Grace Jack v. University of Agriculture Makurdi (2004) LPELR – 1587 SC, (2004); 5NWLR (Pt. 865) 208 and to pronounce on the issue of the number of applicants that may present fundamental rights' cause in court; at any PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences ISSN 2454-5899 57 time it is called upon to do so. The paper also recommended in the alternative, a tinkering of the FREP Rules to specifically handle the issues.","PeriodicalId":197416,"journal":{"name":"PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences","volume":"72 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"INSTITUTING FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ACTIONS IN NIGERIA: UNRESOLVED ISSUES\",\"authors\":\"C. Chijioke, Boma Geoffrey Toby\",\"doi\":\"10.20319/pijss.2020.63.5669\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Instituting fundamental Right actions has become one of the most popular forms of litigations in Nigeria; and for this credit must be given to the very liberal Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009 (FREP RULES) as against the FREP Rules, 1979 which is repealed. One cannot boldly say, without fear of contradiction that our courts are as proactive in their approach to some basic issues in fundamental rights litigation as the FREP Rules intends. This paper set out to re-visit the issue of jurisdiction in respect of fundamental rights litigations and required number of applicants permitted to institute to such actions; reviewing some authorities in the course and finally resolving that there is need for the apex court to finally distinguish between its decisions in Turkur v. Government of Gongola State (1988) All NLR 42 and Grace Jack v. University of Agriculture Makurdi (2004) LPELR – 1587 SC, (2004); 5NWLR (Pt. 865) 208 and to pronounce on the issue of the number of applicants that may present fundamental rights' cause in court; at any PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences ISSN 2454-5899 57 time it is called upon to do so. The paper also recommended in the alternative, a tinkering of the FREP Rules to specifically handle the issues.\",\"PeriodicalId\":197416,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences\",\"volume\":\"72 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2020.63.5669\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2020.63.5669","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

提起基本权利诉讼已成为尼日利亚最流行的诉讼形式之一;在这一点上,必须归功于非常宽松的《2009年基本权利(执行程序)规则》(FREP规则),而不是1979年已被废除的《FREP规则》。人们不能大胆地说,在不担心矛盾的情况下,我们的法院在处理基本权利诉讼中的一些基本问题时,就像FREP规则所打算的那样积极主动。本文件旨在重新探讨基本权利诉讼的管辖权问题,以及获准提起这类诉讼的申请人数目;审查了课程中的一些权威,并最终解决了最高法院需要最终区分其在Turkur诉贡古拉州政府(1988)All NLR 42和Grace Jack诉马库尔迪农业大学(2004)LPELR - 1587 SC,(2004)中的决定;5NWLR (Pt. 865) 208,并就可能在法庭上提出基本权利理由的申请人人数问题发表意见;在任何《PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences》ISSN 2454-5899的时候,它都被要求这样做。该文件还建议在替代方案中,修补FREP规则,以专门处理这些问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
INSTITUTING FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ACTIONS IN NIGERIA: UNRESOLVED ISSUES
Instituting fundamental Right actions has become one of the most popular forms of litigations in Nigeria; and for this credit must be given to the very liberal Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009 (FREP RULES) as against the FREP Rules, 1979 which is repealed. One cannot boldly say, without fear of contradiction that our courts are as proactive in their approach to some basic issues in fundamental rights litigation as the FREP Rules intends. This paper set out to re-visit the issue of jurisdiction in respect of fundamental rights litigations and required number of applicants permitted to institute to such actions; reviewing some authorities in the course and finally resolving that there is need for the apex court to finally distinguish between its decisions in Turkur v. Government of Gongola State (1988) All NLR 42 and Grace Jack v. University of Agriculture Makurdi (2004) LPELR – 1587 SC, (2004); 5NWLR (Pt. 865) 208 and to pronounce on the issue of the number of applicants that may present fundamental rights' cause in court; at any PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences ISSN 2454-5899 57 time it is called upon to do so. The paper also recommended in the alternative, a tinkering of the FREP Rules to specifically handle the issues.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A STUDY ON THE POTENTIAL OF CHINA’S EXPORT TRADE OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS TO THE TEN ASEAN COUNTRIES ---NEW EVIDENCE FROM THE PANEL CS-ARDL MODEL ENHANCING SUSTAINABLE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT THROUGH COLLECTIVE ORGANIZATIONAL ENGAGEMENT AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP-DRIVEN ACTION SPIRIT THE UTILITY OF CAFÉS IN TOWN FOCUSING ON THE TWO FUNCTIONS OF ‘THE THIRD PLACE’ THE IMPACT OF TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF DIGITAL MARKETING ON TIKTOK EXPLORING THE GLOBAL IMPACT OF CHATGPT IN HIGHER EDUCATION FROM STUDENTS PERSPECTIVE
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1