The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja has reaffirmed the supremacy of constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights, holding that statutory pre-action notice requirements cannot prevent individuals from approaching the courts to enforce their fundamental rights.
The appellate court made the pronouncement in a suit challenging certain provisions of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) 2020, in which the National Assembly was restored as a party to the proceedings.
The judgment, delivered on 17 September 2026 and reported on 19 October 2026, underscores the constitutional right of citizens to seek judicial protection whenever their fundamental rights are allegedly violated.
Constitutional Rights Take Precedence Over Statutory Restrictions
The Court of Appeal held that the failure to serve a statutory three-month pre-action notice cannot operate as a barrier to proceedings instituted for the enforcement of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
The decision reinforces the principle that statutory procedural requirements must be interpreted consistently with the Constitution, which remains the supreme law of Nigeria.
Section 46(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) guarantees the right of any person who alleges that the provisions of Chapter IV have been, are being or are likely to be contravened in relation to them to approach a High Court for redress.
The appellate court's position highlights the importance of ensuring that procedural requirements do not undermine constitutionally protected rights.
National Assembly Restored as Party to CAMA Suit
In its decision, the Court of Appeal restored the National Assembly as a party to the proceedings challenging certain provisions of CAMA 2020.
The development allows the National Assembly to participate in the litigation concerning the constitutionality of the disputed statutory provisions.
The underlying challenge to those provisions remains a separate question from the procedural issue addressed by the appellate court.
Implications for Legal Practitioners and Fundamental Rights Litigation
The judgment is significant for legal practitioners, particularly those involved in constitutional litigation, public interest advocacy and the enforcement of fundamental rights.
It provides guidance on the relationship between statutory pre-action notice requirements and the constitutional right of access to the courts.
The decision also reinforces the responsibility of public institutions to respect constitutionally guaranteed rights and underscores the judiciary's role in safeguarding those rights against procedural obstacles inconsistent with constitutional protections.
However, the ruling should not be interpreted as abolishing pre-action notice requirements in all categories of civil proceedings. Its significance lies particularly in the context of proceedings genuinely instituted for the enforcement of fundamental rights.
Conclusion
The Court of Appeal's decision represents an important development in Nigerian constitutional jurisprudence, reaffirming that statutory procedural requirements cannot override constitutionally guaranteed rights.
For legal practitioners and members of the public, the ruling further highlights the importance of the judiciary in protecting fundamental rights and ensuring that access to constitutional remedies is not improperly restricted.
Credit: The Sun Nigeria.
LEGAL DIARY NEWS
Promoting Legal Awareness, Judicial Accountability and the Rule of Law.
Comments
Post a Comment
Drop your comment here.