-->
  The Constitutionality of Administrative Adjudication in Nigeria

The Constitutionality of Administrative Adjudication in Nigeria



Administrative adjudication is constitutional, though it is a negation of the principle of separation of powers. Thus, it is not only the courts established by section 6(1) of the 1999 CFRN (as amended) that must exercise judicial functions. This is in tandem with the provisions of section 36(1) of the 1999 CFRN on fair hearing which mandates that courts and tribunals must observe fair hearing in their determination of the civil rights and liabilities of citizens. By section 36(1) “in the determination of his civil rights and obligations including any question or determination by or against any government or authority, a person shall be entitled to a fair hearing within a reasonable time by a court or other tribunal established by law and constituted in such manner as to secure its independence and impartiality”.

As we can see from the fair hearing provisions of section 36(1) of the current 1999 Constitution as amended, courts and tribunals make up the judiciary. Therefore tribunals and similar bodies other than the regular courts have a constitutional and legal basis. It is on this ground that it is respectfully submitted that administrative adjudication as a concept is not an attempt to usurp judicial functions by third parties and therefore cannot be an affront on the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Furthermore, it is trite that given the exigency of modern governance, it has been the practice for the executive arm of government through its administrative agencies to perform judicial and quasi judicial functions. As a matter of factly, a complete separation of powers and distribution of functions among the three organs of government will surely bring government to a standstill. Experience has shown that complete compartmentalization of government powers is not advisable even if practicable.  The different organs of government are to a large extent dependent upon one another. Therefore administrative adjudication cannot be an attempt to usurp judicial function by the executive.

Lastly, the judiciary is constitutionally empowered to review administrative adjudication. In other words, a court may intervene to review the decision or action of a tribunal, at the application by or on behalf of an aggrieved party. Judicial intervention in such cases may be premised on lack of jurisdiction and or locus standing, breach of the principles of fair hearing or ultra vires.
Our website contains a wealth of free, reliable legal information. Here, you'll find information about starting and legally maintaining a company, partnership, or sole proprietorship, as well as information about franchises, general business law and taxation. For more on business law, see the links on http://www.legalemperors.com.
© Onyekachi Duru Esq and www.legalemperors.com, 2016 (All Rights Reserved). Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excepts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Onyekachi Duru Esq and www.legalemperors.com with appropriate and specific directions to the original content.
The post you have just read and indeed all other posts emanating from http://www.legalemperors.com contains general legal information and does not contain legal advice. http://www.legalemperors.com is not a law firm or a substitute for a lawyer or law firm. The law is complex and changes often. 
For Legal Advice, please ask a Lawyer






02:31:00  Administrative Adjudication, Administrative Law, Law Lecture Series, lectures

Share this:

Previous Next