FAIR HEARING IN JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS

FAIR HEARING IN JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
ABSTRACT
This work entitled “Fair Hearing in Judicial Proceedings” brings to the fore the concept of fair hearing in Nigerian Courts. It is common knowledge that the right to fair hearing in Judicial Proceedings is one of the most important rights enshrined in the Constitution and guaranteed by same. The rules as when a person is entitled to this right is clear cut; the Court, however, during judicial proceedings has set parameters that should be met by anyone who tries to claim that this most important right has been denied him. This, among other things, has been addressed in this work. This work intends to tackle the problems associated with the accordance of fair hearing to the persons or individuals who claim that they are in one way or the other entitled to same. Enjoyment of the right to fair hearing is guaranteed under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. One problem associated with such right especially its enjoyment is a determination and consideration of the circumstances under which the right can be deprived a person.  This work will also consider the circumstances that can limit the enjoyment of the right to fair hearing of an individual. Of paramount importance also is the burning issue of using the concept of lack of fair hearing in Judicial proceedings as a magic wand to try to scuttle judicial proceedings by challenging the jurisdiction of the Court. This work will be based on doctrinal approach and will also be based on descriptive and explanatory method. Reliance will be placed on the secondary sources of law comprising of textbooks, scholars’ views and environmental analyst, journals, conference, workshop papers, case law and Internet material. At the end of the research, it was recommended that, among others, the 1999 Nigerian Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria should also be reviewed in such a way that the pronoun him should refer to him/her. It appears as if every Nigerian is of the male gender, going by most Sections or provisions of the 1999 Constitution. generalizing both sexes with the pronoun him is not desirable for a Constitution. Every other good Law should equally be devoid of any ambiguity. This suggestion for a review of the pronoun him equally applies to the different Law Reports all over the World being used by Lawyers for research and other good purposes.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE: GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.1    Background of Study                
1.2    Statement of Problem                         
1.3    Research Questions                            
1.4    Aims and Objectives of Study                  
1.5    Research Methodology                                       ,    
1.6    Scope of Study                                                 
1.7    Literature Review                    
1.8    Organizational Layout               
CHAPTER TWO: THE CONCEPT OF FAIR HEARING IN JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS IN NIGERIA
 2.1.  Fair Hearing                         
2.1.1. Audi alteram partem: Hear the other Side       
2.1.2. Nemo judex in causa sua: No One Should be a Judge in His Own Cause
 2.2. Judicial Proceedings                     
     2.3. Legal Instruments Safeguarding and Providing for Fair Hearing      
   2.3.1     The Constitution                          
   2.3.2.     The Merits of the Constitutional provision of Fair Hearing Provision   
         2.4.     Criteria of Fair Hearing                            
     2.5.     Determinants of Compliance with Criteria for Fair Haring          
       CHAPTER THREE:   THE ROLE OF FAIR HEARING IN THE DISPENSATION OF    JUSTICE IN NIGERIA
    3.1    Role of Administrative Bodies and Tribunals                                
3.2.   Effect of Bias in the Administration of Justice                  
       3.3.   The Effect of a breach of fair hearing in Judicial Proceedings in Nigeria                 
       3.4.    Burden on Party Alleging Breach of Fair Hearing               
CHAPTER FOUR: WAIVER AND ATTRIBUTES OF FAIR HEARING IN JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
     4.1.       Waiver of the right to fair hearing in Judicial Proceedings       
     4.1.1     Approach in Some Selected Jurisdictions             
4.2.       Some attributes of Fair Hearing in Judicial Proceedings   
      4.2.1.   Right to adequate time and facilities to prepare for defense  
      4.2.2.   Right to Counsel                              
      4.2.3. Right to examination witnesses                    
      4.2.4. Right to the Assistance of an Interpreter               
      4.2.5 Right against double Jeopardy                     
  CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION                    
 5.1    Summary of Findings                             
 5.2.    Recommendations                                                
     5.3.     Conclusion                              
Bibliography                                  
 
 TABLE OF CASES
Adigun v. Attorney-General of Oyo State (1987) 1 NWLR (Pt53) `           
Agbaso v. Iwunze (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt 1471)                    
Ajayi v. Zaria Native Authority [1964] NNLR 61             
Akande v State ( 1988) 2 N.W.L.R. (Pt 85)                       
Akande v. Nigerian Army (2001) 8 NWLR (Pt714)                    
Akoh v. Abuh (1988) NWLR PT 85pg 676 (SC)                  
Alakija vs Medical Disciplinary Committee (1959), 4 FSC 38            
 Ariori v. Elemo [2001] 36 WRN 94; [1983] All NLR 1.           
Awolowo v. Minister of Internal Affairs 1962] LLR 17              
Ayorinde v. Fayoyin [2001] FWLR (Pt. 75)                    
Basheshar Nath v. The Commissioner of Income Tax [1959}            
 Calabar Vs Esiaga (1977) 4 NWLR (PL 502) 719                  
Daniels v. United States 17 F.2d 339;                     
Deduwa v. Okorodudu (1976) 10 SC 329                     
Denge v. Ndakwoji (1992) 1NWLR (Pt. 216)              
 Ezechukwu v. Onwuka [2005] All FWLR (Pt. 280)                               
 F.C.S.C. v Laoye (1989) 2 NWLR (Pt 652)               
Falomo v. Lagos State Public Service Commission (1977) All NLR        
First Alstate Securities Ltd v. Adesoye Holdings Ltd (2013)              
Francis Durwode v. The State [2000] 12 SCNJ 1                   
Franklyn vs Minister of Town and Country Planning (1947)1 All ER 612     
Gopka v. Inspector General of Police [1961] 1 All NLR 423.         
 Grace Akinfe v. The State [1988] 7 SCNJ (Pt. 2)                    
Green v. United States (1957) 355 US 184 at 187-188             
Gyang & Anor v. COP Lagos State& Ors (2014) 3 NWLR (PT 1395)           
Hart V. Military Government of Rivers State (1976) 11 SC           
Idirisu v. The State 1967] 1 All NLR 32.                        
Ikpana v. Regd, Trustees, Presbyterian Church of Nigeria & 5 Ors           
Jibrin v. Commissioner of Police (2006) ALL FWLR (Pt. 305)            
Josiah v. The State [1985] 1 NWLR (Pt. 1)                        
Kotoye v. CBN (1989) 1 NWLR PT 98                     
Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee V. Fawehinmi (1985) 7 SC        
Maikyo v. Itodo (2007) 7 NWLR PT 1034                        
 Mohammed v. Kano Native Authority [1968] 1 All NLR 424.       
Obadara v Resident of Ibadan West District Grade D Customary Court  
Ogundoyin v. Adeyemi [2001] FWLR (Pt. 71)                    
Olugbenga Daniel v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2014) 8 NWLR PT 1410      
Omoniyi v. Central School Board (1988) 4 NWLR (pt 89) 449 at 451      
R. v. Edu 14 WACA 163,                               
R. v. Noku 6 WACA 203;                                  
State v. Duke & 2 Ors (2003) FWLR (Pt. 171)                     
 State v. McTague [1927] 173 Min. 153;                          
Sussex Justices, Ex Parte McCarthy [1924] 1 K. B. 256              
 Tamti v Nigerian Customs Service Board [2009] 7 NWLR (Pt.1141).        
The Queen v. Eguabor [1962] 1 All NLR 289.                     
 The State v Gwanto [2000] FWLR (Pt. 30) 2583.                         
The State v Test (1922) 65 Mont. 134,                           
The State v. Ajie (2000) 11 NWLR Pt 678                         
The State v. Olu Onagoruwa 1992) 2 NWLR PT 221 p. 33; (1992)              
 Tolu v. Bauchi Native Authority   [1965] NMLR 343.                  
Uguru v. The State (2002) 4 SC (Pt. 2) 13                           
Ukachukwu v. Peoples Democratic Party & Ors (2014) 17                
Umenwa vs Umenwa & Anor (1987) 4NWLR (Pt 67) 407                
Umeze v. The State (1973) 6 SC 221                           
United States v Gill 55 F. 2d 399 (1931).                         
University of Ilorin v. Akinrogunde [2006] All FWLR (Pt. 302)         
Usani v. Duke (2004) 7 NWLR PT 871                        
Uzodinma v. Commissioner of Police [1982] 1 NCR 27.                        
Williams v. Nwosu (2001) 3 NWLR (Pt. 700) 376.                      
Worthington v. United States 1 F.2d 154                        
Zarabe v. State [2003] FWLR (Pt. 187)                          
Zaria Native Authority v. Bakari (1964) NNLR 25        
TABLE OF STATUTES

    Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999.

    Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015.

    LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

    JCA:                 Justice Court of Appeal
    JSC:                Justice Supreme Court
    SC:     Supreme Court
    WACA:                 West African Court of Appeal

 CHAPTER ONE

GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.1.    Background of the Study
It is common knowledge that the right to fair hearing in Judicial Proceedings is one of the most important rights enshrined in the Constitution and guaranteed by same.  The rules as to when a person is entitled to this right is clear cut; the Court, however, during judicial proceedings has set parameters that should be met by anyone who claims that this most important right has been denied such one. This, among other things, will be the focus of this work.

Right to fair hearing can be considered as an inalienable right of man which had ab initio been with man since God created him, hence the incident which transpired in the Garden of Eden when God, even though knowing the reason behind the first man eating of the forbidden fruit, still went on to inquire of the man why he eat of the fruitage of the tree of knowledge of good and bad.  Given the current trend of things in our judicial dispensation and judicial proceedings, there is need to determine when the right to fair hearing can be deprived a person in Judicial Proceedings   and what the law says on the issue of deprivation of such right as enshrined in the Constitution.This aspect is also another foundation spectrum on the need for this work/research to be embarked on.

Though the concept of fair hearing appears to be a household term and many a writer has also written about it, the concept confuses many especially when it comes in conflict with and contradicts the goings-on in Judicial Proceedings. Nevertheless, this work will tie the knot between such confusion and what is allowed and not allowed in Judicial Proceedings. The use of the concept of the right to fair hearing as a magic wand to truncate a successful progress of a case will also be considered. Though the writer in this work considered primarily the concept of fair hearing, other aspect of natural justice will also come to bear in the comprehensive understanding of the concept of fair hearing in Judicial Proceedings.


1.2. Statement of the Problems
This work intends to tackle the problems associated with the accordance of fair hearing to the persons or individuals who claim that they are in one way or the other entitled to same. Enjoyment of the right to fair hearing is guaranteed under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. One problem associated with such right especially its enjoyment is a determination and consideration of the circumstances under which the right can be deprived a person.  This work will also consider the circumstances that can limit the enjoyment of the right to fair hearing of an individual. Of paramount importance also is the burning issue of using the concept of lack of fair hearing in Judicial Proceedings as a magic wand to try to scuttle judicial proceedings by way of challenging the jurisdiction of the Court.
1.3. Research Questions
This research will address, among others, the following research question:
1.    What are the scope and limitations of the right to fair hearing?
2.    Is the operation of the supposed wave of the magic wand of lack of fair hearing in judicial Proceedings automatic?
3.    What is the effect of a successful plea of lack of fair hearing in Judicial Proceedings?
4.    What is the significance of the right to fair hearing in our Judicial Proceedings and our Justice system?
1.4. Aims and Objectives of the Study
This study seeks out, among others, the following specific objectives:
i.    To identify the scope and limitation of fair hearing in Judicial Proceedings
ii.    Ascertain if and when the plea of lack of fair hearing will avail an individual
iii.    Assess the significance of fair hearing in our Judicial Proceedings and Justice System

1.5. Research Methodology
The study will be based on doctrinal approach and will also be based on descriptive and explanatory method. Reliance will be based on the secondary sources comprising of textbooks, scholars and environmental analyst, journals, conference, workshop papers, case law and Internet material.

1.6. Scope of the Study

This research will focus on the Nigerian Justice System Delivery, both civil and criminal, with emphasis on the laws providing the right to fair hearing and the application of these laws to the concept of right to fair hearing during Judicial Proceedings. This work is not concerned with the applicability of foreign laws to the right to fair hearing. Nevertheless, in the discussion and expatiation of this concept, this work would make reference to the content or provisions of foreign laws dealing with and providing for right to fair hearing in Judicial Proceedings.


It is also common knowledge and even as some judges have pointed out that some seasoned lawyers always rely on the supposed fact that fair hearing has been denied them to confront the Court with the request to nullify the entire proceedings on the ground that there was no fair hearing in the judicial proceedings. Our Courts are therefore constantly facing the seeming daunting task of x-raying the nitty-gritties of what the denial of fair hearing really entails in Judicial Proceedings. Fair hearing is anchored on Natural Justice, therefore the twin pillars of natural justice– Nemo Judex In causa sua and Audi Alterem Partem– in Judicial Proceedings in Nigeria will also be considered.  

1.7. Literature Review
The Right to fair hearing with its appurtenances is recognized in our Justice System, both civil and criminal. The grundnorm  of Nigeria recognizes the right to fair hearing as well the circumstances surrounding the right to fair hearing.  

 Akshaya and Dhivya   in their write up observed that it is fundamental to fair procedure that during a fair hearing both sides should be heard. This right to fair hearing requires that individuals are not penalized by certain decisions which tend to affect their rights or certain legitimate expectations.  Nevertheless, the learned authors, in the discussion of the concept of fair hearing, dwelled much on authorities which are not of concern to us in discussing fair hearing in Nigeria. This writer will dwell on Nigeria case that are of significant relevance to us.

[1]The term is used in this work to refer to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria