Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T02:55:51.545Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Dubious Distinction between Principal and Accessory Claims in Nigerian Human Rights Jurisprudence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2008

Abstract

What began as an exercise in defining the jurisdiction of the Nigerian Federal High Court over fundamental human rights has now turned into a well established principle that Nigerian courts will not entertain an action for the enforcement of a fundamental human right contained in chapter IV of the 1999 constitution through the Fundamental Human Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules unless it is the principal claim. In other words, if the action for the enforcement of a fundamental human right is an accessory or subsidiary claim, the action must be started by a writ of summons. This article demonstrates that this distinction is dubious, irrelevant and impossible to make, and leads to a miscarriage of justice.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)