Skip to main content

ILLEGALITY OF MOBILE COURTS IN NIGERIA by Douglas Ogbankwa, Esq.

Section 6 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,1999 (as Amended) puts the judicial powers of the federation on the different judicial bodies created by law. Before any Court can function it must derive its power from an existing Law.

The Code of Conduct Tribunal, the High Courts of States, the Federal High Court, the National Industrial Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court were all specifically created by the relevant dections of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as Amended).

The Magistrate Courts, Customary Courts, the Elections Tribunals, the Investment and Security Tribunal, Census Appeal Tribunal, Tax Appeal Tribunal and even the the Judiciary Panels of Enquiry of the different States of Nigeria are creations of different enabling laws of those States which specifically created them.

In the said Laws ,there is a specific section that says “There shall be Court/Tribunal/Panel…”. That is what essentially confers such Courts/Tribunals/Panels with jurisdiction to adjudicate over any matter. The law that creates a court delimitates the jurisdiction of the court and jurisdiction is intrinsic to adjudication. It is the live wire of adjudication and the essence upon which the power of the court rests. For this proposition See APC v . Engr. Suleiman Aliyu Lere (2020) 1 NWLR (Part 1705)254

The mobile courts in any state of the federation are not courts created by any written law in the Federal Republic of Nigeria. A practice direction of a Chief Judge of a State can not create a court. A practice direction only gives directives on the Procedure to be adopted by a Court that has been created by law.

In the same vein, the mere mention of the mobile court in any law does not confer the mobile court with jurisdictional competence as the Court is not in existence in the first place. You can not put some thing on nothing and expect it to stand. See UAC v.Macfoy (1962) A.C.150 at 160.

Another thorny issue in this matter is that the Mobile Courts are operated in many instances as a Native Court and not a Court of proper pecords, with just the record books of the presiding officer and a scribbled sheet of paper called Charge Sheet and the Presiding Officers until very recent, churned out very obnoxious and unreasonable penalties, including sending the poor and the vulnerable to prison custody.

There are in most cases no statements of witness, no statements of defendants, No unvestigation reports of the alleged infractions of the defendant. Every thing is left to Viva voice evidence and the powers of the oresiding officers all which are against Section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, (As Amended).

Some times, defendants ask for time to enter their defence but they are refused and coerced to give evidence contrary to Section 36 (11) of the Constitution of Nigeria which provides that:

No Person who is tried for a Criminal Offence shall be compelled to give evidence at the trial

In another vein Section 36 (6) & (8) provides thus:

(6)Every person who is charged with a criminal offence shall be entitled to:

(a) be informed promptly in the language that he understands and in detail of the nature of the offence;

(b) be given adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence;

(c) defend himself in person or by legal practitioners of his own choice;

(d) examine, in person or by his legal practitioners, the witnesses called by the prosecution before any court or tribunal and obtain the attendance and carry out the examination of witnesses to testify on his behalf before the court or tribunal on the same conditions as those applying to the witnesses called by the prosecution; and

(e) have, without payment, the assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand the language used at the trial of the offence.

(7) When any person is tried for any criminal offence, the court or tribunal shall keep a record of the proceedings and the accused person or any persons authorised by him in that behalf shall be entitled to obtain copies of the judgement in the case within seven days of the conclusion of the case.

The above sections are clear and unambiguous, they need no further adumbrations.

For civic wrongs, many citizens have been sentenced to prisonsummarily. They are tried right there without being afforded an opportunity or time to be heard or to prepare for their Defence/ and to be represented by a Counsel of their Choice as provided for by Section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (Amas Amended).

It does follows that any Judgment obtained from these Mobile Courts alien to the Nigerian jurisprudential trajectory are liable to be set aside the those illegally convicted can sue for damages from the State or be compensated by the State .

Nigeria is a society guided by laws and not the whims and caprices of officials of government.

I hereby call for the immediate disbandment of all Mobile Court’s in Nigeria. A Court can not be mobile. A Court is avowed for its certainty of venue, certainty of purpose, certainty of procedure/law and strict adherence to laws of the land!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN, NBA ABUJA BRANCH (UNITY BAR)

NBA ABUJA BRANCH CONDEMNS THE ARREST, HARASSMENT AND DETENTION OF LAWYERS IN THE COURSE OF PROFESSIONAL DUTIES The Nigerian Bar Association, Abuja Branch (Unity Bar), strongly condemns the arrest, handcuffing, harassment and detention of *Mr. Simon Eromosele, Esq.*, a member of the NBA Abuja Branch (Unity Bar), on the 14th of August, 2026, while carrying out his legitimate professional duties as Counsel. From the account presented to the Branch, Mr. Eromosele was at the OPay office in Jabi, Abuja, to follow up on a formal request made on behalf of his client concerning debit restrictions placed on the client’s OPay account, and to seek disclosure of the legal basis for the restriction, including the production of any court order purportedly authorising it. Rather than being permitted to complete that professional engagement, Mr. Eromosele was reportedly arrested, handcuffed and taken first to the Utako Police Station and subsequently to the IG Monitoring Unit at Force Headq...

NBA Anaocha Branch Honours Okey Wali, SAN with Hall Naming Recognition.

NBA Anaocha Branch Names Hall After Okey Wali, SAN The (NBA), Anaocha Branch (Family Bar), has resolved to name its main meeting hall after the 26th President of the Association, . This decision was reached during the Branch’s monthly general meeting, where members unanimously approved the naming of the hall as “Hon. Okey Wali, SAN Hall of Honour.” The honour is in recognition of Okey Wali, SAN’s outstanding contributions to the legal profession, as well as his enduring support and commitment to the growth and unity of the Nigerian Bar, particularly the Anaocha Branch. According to the Branch, the resolution reflects deep appreciation for his legacy of service, leadership, and dedication to the advancement of justice and the rule of law. The formal naming and commissioning of the hall will take place during the Branch’s 2026 Law Week , scheduled to commence on May 8, 2026 . The event is expected to attract members of the Bar, senior advocates, and key stakeholders wi...

NBA Abuja Branch Vice Chairman Secures Release of Two Inmates After Three Years in Custody

In a significant human rights intervention, the Vice Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Abuja Branch (Unity Bar), and Chairman of the Branch Human Rights Committee, Ikemefuna Onyeka, Esq., has facilitated the release of two Inmates, Bali Joshua and Paul Sunday, who had been in custody since 2023 in connection with an alleged homicide. Upon assuming office on 31st July 2026, Ikemefuna Onyeka, Esq. was briefed on the prolonged detention of the two individuals, whose matter had remained unresolved for more than three years. Although the Human Rights Committee of the Branch had not yet been formally inaugurated, the Vice Chairman immediately took steps to address the matter, demonstrating an early commitment to the protection of fundamental human rights and access to justice. Following his intervention, Dr. Amin Abdulhaleem, Esq. and Joseph Okolo, Esq. were engaged to commence appropriate legal proceedings for the enforcement of the inmates’ fundamental rights. The...