2022]
RIGHT TO PERSONAL LIBERTY IN NIGERIA
71
in Nigeria.
Second, there is a lack of a mechanism or a check system to
ensure that an accused’s right to interpretation, right to be informed of
charges against him, and right to be conveyed to a court after arrest within
a reasonable time are upheld by the police.
Third, corruption within the
police prevents a legal practitioner from gathering adequate evidence
where his client’s right has been violated.
Fourth, judges and courts
exhibit a lackadaisical attitude towards personal liberty cases brought
before them.
Finally, there are numerous contradictory provisions of
law, an example of which can be found in the examination of Ohimieokpu
v. Commissioner of Police, where Section 101 of the Criminal Procedure
Act could be stated to be conflicting with Section 35 of the Constitution.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROTECTION OF PERSONAL LIBERTY
Clear and unambiguous laws should be drawn out, eradicating all
existing contrary provisions to the Constitution which would infringe on
an accused’s rights.
Individuals who have not been told the charges
brought against them should be released after twenty-four hours, in
accordance with the Writ of Habeas Corpus, which states that individuals
detained must be read the charges brought against them within twenty-
four hours of being detained.
This will in turn decongest the prisons.
Effectiveness should be ensured at the judiciary level by creating checks
on the appearance of judges at court at the stipulated time and preventing
whimsical adjournment of cases.
Adequate enforcement mechanisms
should be established to ensure all accused persons enjoy their rights and
to prevent trial inmates having to wait of over five years.
Punishment
See Ben Ezeamalu, Why Nigeria’s Criminal Justice System is Slow — Judge,
PREMIUM TIMES (Jan. 19, 2018), https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/more-
news/256056-nigerias-criminal-justice-system-slow-judge.html.
See Madubuike-Ekwe & Obayemi, supra note 128, at 35–43.
Id. at 32–34.
See Ezeamalu, supra note 165.
Mohammed Enesi Etudaiye & Muhtar Adeiza Etudaiye, A Legal and
Constitutional Blueprint on Functionalizing “Time Frames” in Some Civil and Political
Rights – A Study of Chapter IV of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999,
7 ESSEX HUM. RTS. REV. 49, 59–62 (2011 (summarizing Ohimieokpu v. Comm’r of Police
[1959] NRNLR 1); CONSTITUTION OF NIGERIA (1999), § 35; Criminal Procedure Act (1945)
Cap. § 101.
Etudaiye & Etudaiye, supra note 169.
CONSTITUTION OF NIGERIA (1999), § 35(4), § 35(5).
U.N. Off. on Drugs and Crime, Ten Years of Justice Sector Reform in Nigeria:
A 360 Degree View, 14 (Apr. 2–3, 2009) [hereinafter UNODC].
See generally Peter Chukwuma Obutte, Corruption, Administration of Justice
and the Judiciary in Nigeria, SSRN, 3, 12 (Feb. 3, 2016),
https://ssrn.com/abstract=2727319.
See Shima, V.A. and Bem Abojo, Trial Within a Reasonable Time Under
Nigerian Law: A Legal Myth or Reality?, 9 BENUE ST. UNIV. L.J. 352, 353 (2019).