Ismail Khadijat Moromoke

1.0 Introduction
If there is any fertile ground for rapid growth and development, a friendly and pollution-free environment will definitely be the answer. Good environment and development are siamese twins; they are practically inseparable. No doubt, Nigeria is a struggling state! The environment in the country is degenerating at an alarming rate raising so many concerns. In a bit to ameliorate the tragic state of the biosphere in Nigeria, the National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency Act (NESREA ACT) was enacted in 2017 replacing the erstwhile Federal Environmental Protection Agency Act (FEPA Act).

Despite the high expectations that NESREA Act will correct the defects in the relevance of its antecedent in the Nigerian environment, the NESREA Act was just an old drink in a new bottle. Therefore, it is important to address the need for the NESREA Act to be up to task to guarantee and ensure the protection of the one Earth within the peculiarities of Nigeria as a nation.

2.0 The Nigerian Earth before the Birth of NESREA ACT 2007
In those days, environmental safety was of family importance. The authorities did not see any need to enact laws or even regulations in protecting the earth. At worst, the most conscious role of people with regards to sustainability of the natural nature of the land was within the purview of environmental sanitation. The pockets of laws on regulating the environment, though not effective, that were available particularly before Nigeria gained her independence in 1960, were the provision of the Criminal Code Act which criminalized air and water population as well as Public Health Act. With the surprising discovery of oil in large marketable quantities after independence, the pollution of the Nigerain environment knew no bounds. As if this was not enough, other countries such as Italy around 1987-88 saw Nigeria as a good dumping ground for their toxic and harmful waste debris thereby facilitating environmental protection law regime in Nigeria with the following laws being enacted:

Federal Environmental Protection Decree of 1988 amended by the Decree 59 of 1992;

Oil Pipeline Act of 1956;

Petroleum Act of 1969 (now repealed);

Environmental Impact Assessment Act of 1992; and

Harmful Waste (Special Criminal Provisions) Act 1998.
3.0 The New Dawn: Any Impacts?
One could have reasonably imagine that the partial or insubstantial relevance of the FEPA Act in ensure environmental sustainability in Nigeria will be improved upon by the NESREA Act when it was enacted in 2007. Sadly, the imagination only ended as imagination without any shadow of reality.

Section 20 of the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 provides that, “the state shall protect and improve the environment and safeguard the water, air and land, forest and wild life of Nigeria”. It was pursuant to this and the inherent legislative power of the National Assembly that the NESREA was established through the NESREA Act with the aim of “securing for the Nigerian people, a healthier, decent, habitable and sustainable environment within the vision and mission of the agency”.

The question begging for answer is, “Whether or not Nigeria is truly healthy, decent and habitable to an ideal individual despite the fifteen years of existence of the NESREA Act? The answer to this question must definitely be in negation.
Surprisingly, there is absolute no area of the Nigerian environment that has not been regulated under the various regulations of NESREA numbering up to 35! Not only that, the NESREA Act is embroidered with a lot of relevant provisions in the protection of the one earth especially the beautiful wordings in Section 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26 and 27 of the Act to ensure that Nigeria should be an earth where life can exist comfortably. Compliance and Enforcement of all the relevant provisions of NESREA Act in sustaining the Nigerian environment continue poise as a challenge to the Agency.
In a bid to pursue the protection of the environment, the court held in Centre for Oil Pollution and Waste v NNPC to the effect that the right to protection of the environment is an enforceable right that can not be jettisoned with. It is a right that must be safeguarded!

The inability of the NESREA Act and the Agency itself to meet up with the expectations of the Nigerian populace is credited to several numbers of factors. One of which is lack of awareness. Many people are unaware of the Agency itself, its roles and their (people’s) responsibility with regards to safeguarding the environment. If not for the World Environmental Day that is celebrated every June 5th, thousands people would have been kept in the darkness with regards to environment conservation.

Limited scope of the NESREA Act 2007 is a contributory factor to its failure to have a meaningful impact in protecting the one Earth. The phrase “other than in the oil and gas sector” notoriously written in almost all the section of the Act is nothing but a stumbling block to a successful environmental protection legal regime in Nigeria. As it has been earlier discussed, one of the main reason that brought a conscious move in protecting the Nigerian environment was the adverse effects of oil activities after it was discovered. There is virtually no environmental media be it air, water and land that the impacts of oil and gas activities have not been adversely felt. The Niger Delta Region of the country is a living testimony!
A fifteen years old Act is overdue for amendment! The major purpose of amendment of legislation is to reflect the new changes and advancements in the society. Not repealing the NESREA Act is also a factor to its failure to meet up with expectations of protecting the one Earth. The successful impact of a legislation in a state can only be achieved if the said law portrays the dynamism and reflects the peculiarities of that state.

Duplication of functions and multiplicity of laws are some of the hindrance to NESREA in executing its primary role of protecting the Nigerian environment. Low manpower and inadequate source of finance can not be overlook in the process of analysing the extent of the success of NESREA Act in the protection of the one earth.

4.0 Towards the Protection of the One Earth: NESREA ACT On The Run
Earth which is a place where things exist must be safe and comfortable. Particularly in Nigeria, the various principal factors that are highlighted to be the causes of ecological and environmental hazards in Nigeria ranging from selfishness, greed, ignorance, short sighted viewpoint and self-centeredness should be shun away from. All these factors will worsen the deteriorating state of the Nigerian environment which the NESREA Act seeks to protect.
It is something to make a law and it is another thing to enforce it. The NESREA Act should not be a toothless bull dog that does not have any force of law. The officials in various organizational structures of the Agency should be up to task to enforce the Act. While making efforts to enforce the NESREA Act, the federal legislature should see the amendment of the fifteen years old Act as something paramount. This is because, widening the scope of the Act through amendment to reflect the present realities in the Nigerian environment and to encompass the regulation of oil and gas activities that are hazardous to the environment without necessarily infringing on already existing laws on oil and gas, will surely be a major driver to a sustainable environment in Nigeria.
In a bid to make the NESREA Act performance wonderful well in protecting the one earth within the purview of Nigeria as a nation, a community based approach is required. This approach is better known as bottom to the top strategy whereby the individuals, families, small communities, larger communities till the government in a linear arrangement collectively support the need to maintain a sustainable environment in Nigeria.

5.0 Conclusion
Though, it appears to be impossible due to the state of the earth especially in Nigeria, but then, all hope is not yet lost. It demands collective efforts with more emphasis on the best ways as explained earlier, in which NESREA Act can be positioned to enable it plays it role perfectly well so as to ensure the protection and development of the One Earth that every Nigeria wish to experience.

Ismail Khadijat Moromoke known as Khadijat Moromoke Ismail YourNumberOneContentWriter on LinkedIn, is a 200 level law undergraduate in University of Ilorin studying Common and Islamic law. She has keen interest and undying love for content writing as well as articles and research works. She can be reachable via email- moromokekhadijat@gmail.com and via mobile- 07014015871

1.0 Introduction
In Nigeria today, many have been marginalized because they lack legal representation. When citizens have limited or no access to justice, definitely, the light of rule of law will began to dwindle. In order to ensure that citizens are duly represented whenever their rights are in question, the Legal Aid Council was established in 1976 during the military era by the promulgation of the Legal Aid Decree now Legal Aid Act, 2011 to save the situation. It is so sad that most average Nigerians are yet to taste the sweetness of adequate legal representation. This appalling state of Nigeria justice system is due to many factors in which only two are examined in this article which have hindered a successful legal aid regime in Nigeria. Hopefully, if the enumerated recommendations are duly considered by the concerned bodies and organs, access of justice in Nigeria may see a new limelight that is citizens-centered and social stability-focused.

2.0 Conceptualizing Legal Aid under Different Legal Frameworks
In a simple term, legal aid is the various legal assistance rendered to a person who is in need of it but incapable of securing the service of a legal practitioner. Legal aid guarantees right to fair hearing of every individual as entrenched in Section 36 of the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, As Amended. Oputa JSC in Josiah v State and Idoko J. in Uzodinma v C.O.P emphatically reinforced the said constitutional provision by assigning counsel to represent the accused in the two cases respectively. The rationale being that justice can not be administered effectively without the service of a lawyer.
Also, the grundnorm in Section 46(4)(b) empowers the National Assembly to enact the Legal Aid Act to serve as provisions on how citizens especially the indigent ones can seek redress through legal aid in the enforcement of their fundamental rights. It should be noted that legal aid is recognized not only under Nigerian laws but also under various regional and international instruments.

Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 7(1)(c) of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights, Article 14(3)(d) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 37(d) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and Article 2 and 21 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) are some of the legal frameworks pointing at the need to ensure that every individual, whether rich or poor, young or old, male or female, are given the equal opportunity to display their grievances and allow courts and other dispute resolution mechanisms to adjudicate over their issues.

3.0 Legal Aid as an Accelerator of Justice
“Justice is a human need while access to justice is a human right. Indeed, legal aid is indispensable particularly in a country where vast majority of its citizenry are wallowing in abject poverty. By virtue of Section 10 of the Legal Aid Act, except in exceptional cases, it is only persons living below the minimum wage in the country are entitled to legal aid. Others can be granted aid on contributory basis if they are earning ten times the minimum wage. These provisions are unrealistic in the Nigeria of today. Many might be earning above the minimum wage which is thirty thousand naira yet, they are still poor! The reality is that the unbearable economic situation of the country has made the minimum wage worthless.

According to a news report by Picodi, an international e-commerce company, “the value of basic food products for the healthy living of an adult in a month, at the beginning of 2022, stood at #40,980, higher than the #30,000 minimum wage in Nigeria”. This fact renders the provision of Section 10(1) of the Legal Aid Act, 2011 due for amendment because quite a large number of persons in Nigeria have been disentitled to legal aid services all in the name of “they are living above a meagre minimum wage”.
Legal aid ensures that a person accused of committing an offence, either civil or criminal is duly represented both before and during trial. When adequately provided, legal aid prevents long pre-trial detention in correctional centres thereby breathing life into the provision of Section 35(4) of the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 As Amended.
Legal Aid also facilitates speedy dispensation of justice so as to reduce congestion in prisons which causes wide spread of infectious diseases. Another laudable relevance of legal aid in the Nigerian justice system is the prevention of clogs of cases in courts by providing other means of settling disputes such as the Citizens’ Mediation Centres established across the country.
For a meaningful administration of justice is to be achieved, “the importance of legal aid cannot be over-emphasized”.

4.0 Impediments towards a Successful Legal Aid Regime in Nigeria
Assuming that the rationale behind the enactment of the Legal Aid Act has been achieved, the rate of inaccessibility to courts of average Nigerians would have reduced to a great extent. However, it is necessary to stop fruitless assumptions and face the reality of the current situations in Nigeria as far as legal aid is concerned.
There are many factors that contributed to the unsuccessful regime of legal aid in Nigeria but only two major factors will be considered. They are the impact of Nigerian Bar Association(NBA) and the Legal Aid Council(the council) towards adequate legal representation and access to justice.
The NBA has a major role in facilitating equal access to justice but it has not been up to the task. This is because many legal practitioners have lost interest in pro bono cases! The culture of pro bono which is a short form of the latin phrase pro bono publico meaning “for the public good” is not adequately encouraged among members of the NBA. Aside from being part of the requirements of Conferment as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), there have not been any other tangible and effective regulations and mediums to promote pro bono culture among practitioners thereby making lawyers that voluntarily take up cases not necessarily due to financial gains but for sake of humanity very difficult to come by.

Although, NBA made moves to promote pro bono culture among its members through the Pro bono Declaration of 2009 and now 2015, it can not be said that this Declaration is effective owing to the discouraging attitude of Nigerian legal practitioners towards indigent citizens that are in need of legal assistance desperately.
As for the Legal Aid Council, quite a large of people do not know the council exist. Some indigent Nigerians are not even aware that they have the right to legal aid provided by the council. It sounds really absurd! This is majorly because “most of their offices are located at the federal or state capitals, and their services and addresses are hardly advertised. This has leads to unawareness on the part of the people of the existence of the council and its services.”
In addition, “it is estimated that the council handles averagely 25,000 cases(both criminal and civil) annually for indigent Nigerians”. The estimate is relatively low compared to the over 200 million population in Nigeria whose majority have limited or no financial capacity to hire a lawyer when they are suspected, detained or accused of committing an offence. It is important to note that insufficient funds and inadequacy of personnel are the major stumbling blocks hindering qualitative and quantitative service delivery of the council.

5.0 Prospective Solutions to enhance Equal Access and Speedy Dispensation of Justice
In order to promote pro bono culture among legal practitioners in NBA and to improve the efficiency of the Council in the light of proper administration of justice, the following recommendations should be duly considered:

• The NBA should award legal practitioners that passionately engage in pro bono services not necessarily financial awards but recognizing them at its various conferences and seminars so as to encourage others to follow their footprints;
• The NBA Pro bono Declaration should have full force of law;
• Engaging in certain number of free legal aid service to indigent citizens especially those in correctional centres should be part of the qualifications for election in NBA both in its branches and at the national level;
• The Nigerian government should improve the working conditions of lawyers in the council and employ more private legal practitioners into the council for a standard service delivery;
• Proper funding of the council in order to improve the number of cases it handles annually should be looked into;
• Non-governmental organizations should assist the legal aid council in creating awareness about the council, its services, mode of its application and on general legal education;
• Nigerian Law firms visit correctional centres often and render legal assistance to indigent inmates that are in detention awaiting trial so as to facilitate their quick access to justice.
• The curriculum of law undergraduates and graduates in law school by the Council of Legal Education should be fashioned in such a way that the culture of engaging in free legal aid service will be implanted at the early stage;
• The Legal Aid Act 2011 should be amended in line with the present realities of the Nigerian society; and
• There should be strong partnership and effective collaboration between the Legal aid council and Network of University Legal Aid Institutions(NULAI) in order to promote pro bono culture among budding lawyers.

6.0 Conclusion
Legal aid is an integral part of administration of justice which can not be isolated from it. Therefore, it becomes imperative on all relevant stakeholders, agencies, bodies, government, paralegals, academic institutions, non-governmental organizations and legal practitioners in their individual capacity to ensure that justice is properly dispensed and prevent justice from being delayed. This is because justice delayed is as good as justice denied.

This article is written by Ismail Khadijat Moromoke – a student of Common and Islamic law, University of Ilorin. She is a student of law that has keen interest on how the law can be a tool for social change. She can be reachable via email- moromokekhadijat@gmail.com , LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/khadijat-moromoke-8a72a7213 and via mobile 07014015871

1.0 Introduction

Political office holders had never dreamt that a time bomb would explode against them. The judgment of the penultimate court according to hierarchy of courts in Nigeria released the unexpected in 2019 and it was received with mixed feelings. Everyone was surprised to know if the court of appeal as laid down a new principle of law. It is expedient to critically evaluate and analyze the court of appeal judgment in this instant case in line with the justifiability of the payment of severance allowances and pensions to public office holders ending with some key recommendations.

2.0 Background of the Fact of the Case

The appelants in this instant case formerly the defendants was not satisfied with the judgment of R.B. Hanstrup J on 31st October, 2017 at the lower court- National Industrial Court held at Abuja which was in favour of the claimants now the respondents that they are entitled to severance allowances and pensions. Aggrieved, the appellants filed a notice of appeal without the leave of the court since the grounds of appeal are not bothering on fundamental rights as contained in section 243(2) and (3) of the 1999 Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria as altered and the appeal is of right. Both parties filed their respective briefs of arguments upon two grounds wherein the appellant raised two issues while the respondents raised one only. Justice Emmanuel Akomaye Again(JCA) who delivered the judgment on the case made an obiter which goes into the root of the appeal which should have quashed the case but it was heard on merit without the court having jurisdiction. This has led to injustice to law, the court and the parties involved.

3.0 Appraisal of the appeal judgment

Regardless of the errors, the judgement of the court of appeal is applaudable. It laid down some principles of law and one of which is that originating summons can be used in cases where the substantial disputes of facts can be resolved on the affidavits and accompanying exhibits without the need to recognize to oral evidence to resolve them. Also, it reinstates the provisions of section 131(1) and (2) of the Evidence Act 2011 on burden of proof in civil matters.

The court of appeal was able to reversed the ruling of the trial court when it held that “since the claimant’s evidence failed to establish their case, the trial court should have dismissed the claimant’s case, instead of resorting to calling in aid, general, terse and speculative denials of the claimant’s case in the defendant’s counter affidavit, characterised them as substantial dispute of facts and on that basis give the claimants another opportunity to represent their case by way pleadings, after a full hearing of their case in merit”. This overruling judgement couldn’t be reach if the justices of the court of appeal where not embodiments of law.

4.0 Analysis and Critique of the Court Decision

4.1 Law is Moral: How sound? In delivering the judgement, the learned Justice Emmanuel, JCA held that the payment of severance allowances to the respondents after their tenure in their respective public offices is morally wrong. The court went further to hold that “the fact that the right (to severance allowances and pensions) is provided in the constitution and thereby made a constitutional right, does not make it morally right.

The questions now are; is the law a moral norm? Has morality taken the position of law? Is law not going to be applicable if it is not in conformity with people’s moral behaviors which are subjective? The penultimate court held to the effect that the payment of severance allowances and pensions to public office holders/appointees is legally right but morally wrong.

This is so glaring that everyone sees the court as court of moral not of law! Morality and law are two different concepts that are different from each other. Though morals should flow from the law, the law should remain supreme over and above morality. It is on this flowery that the court of appeal ruled against the respondents. It is so clear that the judgement can not stand the test of time definitely!

4.2 Jurisdiction: The Life Wire Aside from the fact that the judgement was laid down on a watery stand, the court itself proclaimed that it doesn’t have jurisdiction to hear the suit. Although, the issue of jurisdiction was raised suo motu by the court by the way, it goes into the root of the court to hear and determine this instant case. In fact, the court affirmed when it held inter alia that “as it is, this appeal is incompetent and this court lacks jurisdiction to entertain it”. By going ahead to hear the matter on merit, everything including the judgement delivered is deemed to be an exercise in futility and will be marooned in the miasma of nullity.

Even, Obaseki, JSC(as he then was) propounded in OLOHA v AKEREJA(1988)3 NWLR (PT. 84) 508, (1988)7 S.C (PT.1) that “…there is no justice in exercising jurisdiction where there is none. It is injustice to the law, to the court and to parties so to do”. Since the court does not have jurisdiction to determine this instant case in the first instance, severance allowances and pensions to public office holders/appointees should subsist.

5.0 Conclusion and Recommendations

The court of appeal judgement in this case is clothed with application of legal principles and depicts clear and sound application of law. However, the law is settled that issue of jurisdiction is very fundamental and without it, the whole proceedings of the court will be wasted efforts. The ground on which the court held that the respondents are not entitled to severance allowances and pensions is unknown to law and it may be reversed on appeal to supreme court.

It is only the justices of the supreme court that are regarded as infallible since they are final. On this, the following recommendations will enhance the justifiability of the payment of severance allowances and pensions to public office holders in Nigeria and it include:

1. Until the constitution is amended, the issue of severance allowances and pensions to public office holders remains justified; and

2. An Act of the national assembly should be enacted to facilitate the regulation of severance allowances.

Ismail Khadijat Moromoke A 200 level common and Islamic law student University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria https://www.linkedin.com/in/khadijat-moromoke-8a72a7213 and reachable via moromokekhadijat@gmail.com and 07014015871