"Rather than create the enabling environment for Foreign Direct Investments; Nigerian governments routinely breach contracts with relative impunity and thereby ultimately undermine their investment drives."
The foregoing constituted the premise of my LLM Dissertation submitted to @KCL_Law of @KingsCollegeLon in August 2019 with the title, 'An Appraisal of the Legal/ Regulatory Regime for the Promotion & Protection of Foreign Investments in Nigeria'.
Exactly 12 months after that assertion, it is regrettable to report that rather than improve, things have largely degenerated and both tiers of Govt in Nigeria (do the LGAs still count?) have declared war on businesses. In hindsight we should have seen it coming.
Since we all agree that with the right economic policies, FDI inflow into developing economies can be a major catalyst for economic devt, why do Nigeria & other African countries fail in their quest for improved FDI? These past weeks, Nigerian govts have given us the answer.
I am not ignorant of the economic difficulties that countries all over the world are facing in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. The fundamental question is whether Nigerian Govts have acted in a way that is deserving of the benefit of the doubt? The answer is in the question.
I said to those who cared to listen that I could not wrap my head around the decision to impose an economic lockdown in Nigeria apart from the reason that we did it because other countries did as well. But did we also provide the palliatives that those countries provided?
By way of recap, the UK Govt paid wages of furloughed workers up to £2500 a month so they could stay at home. Canadian Govt gave $2000 a month. US passed $2 Trillion Relief package. Of course we all saw that Tweet from the UAE or was is Saudi? Granted we didn't have the money...
What did Nigerian Govt do? Gave loans to some businesses (let's not even go there), spent N500 Billion on the poor (no comments) and so on. Did Govt cut the cost of governance? No, instead they took more foreign loans to fund the bloated style of governance.
If only it ended there...
With businesses just recovering from a 3-month lockdown and looking for ways to survive, they have been hit with all manners of taxes and levies. In the same period that VAT wad increased, next NIPOST, now Lagos State Govt. It hasn't even ended.
It has been suggested that Nigerian govt officials across all levels take their chances and breach contracts because they know that the case would be stuck in courts while their tenures run out. The frequency of contractual breaches make this a credible assumption.
What they fail to factor in is the option under International Investment Law whereby foreign investors have tailored dispute resolution mechanisms that allow them challenge these contractual breaches. These mechanisms are independent, efficient and relatively speedy.
I will use the charges sought to be introduced by the Lagos State Govt on e-hailing taxi companies [some of whom are owned by foreign investors] as a demonstrative example of the potential breach of the Fair and Equitable Treatment standard in BITs and the possible consequences.
In this thread @adetolaov summarises in very stark detail, the terms of the new Guidelines issued by the Lagos State Government.
What I propose to do is to break down the potential liability that the Lagos State Government and by extension the Federal Republic of Nigeria face if someone decides to challenge these actions. You can then extrapolate this to the rest of the decisions they have been taking.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
One thing that we can all agree on is that in the course of its 60+ years of existence, the Supreme Court of Nigeria has proved itself to be one of the most important institutions of the Government of Nigeria. The Court attained this through the thousands of decisions that have emanated from the hallowed chambers of the Court’s Justices.
With an estimate of about 10,000 judgments delivered by the apex Court since 1963, attempting to select the 10 most influential of these cases is an impossible task. But that is precisely what I have set out to do in this thread. Obviously, I am not old enough to have experienced the apex Court in all its glory, but I have a sense of the outstanding history of the Court.
In arriving at this final 10, I have considered the frequency with which the chosen cases have been cited subsequently in other cases; I have prioritised decisions that have stood the test of time, especially those that have not been overturned or are unlikely to be overturned; I have included famous and notorious decisions alike, including some that I don't like; and also those that changed the course of history; etc.
Any Nigerian lawyer that is not familiar with these cases should safeguard their Call to Bar Certificate as their most prized possession, because if the Council of Legal Education sees it, they are entitled to retrieve it.
I should also add that this listed is limited to decisions of the Nigerian Supreme Court and so landmark cases such Rylands v Fletcher (1868), Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1893), Salomon v Salomon & Co Ltd (1897), Donoghue v Stevenson (1932), Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation (1948), etc. which greatly influenced, and perhaps continues to influence legal jurisprudence in Nigeria, have no place in the list.
Without further ado, please see below my list of the 10 Most Influential Judgments of the Nigerian Supreme Court since 1960.
1. Madukolu v. Nkemdilim (1962) 2 S.C.N.L.R. 341
When the Federal Supreme Court Coram Brett, Taylor and Bairamian (F.JJ.) delivered the judgment in Madukolu v. Nkemdilim on Monday, the 12th day of November 1962, I am not sure that even they knew how far reaching that judgment would go. I do not think that there is any other Nigerian case that has been cited as many times as Madukolu v. Nkemdilim which established the fundamental principles of a court's competence to exercise jurisdiction. In essence, the Supreme Court held that a court must be properly constituted, the subject matter must be within its jurisdiction, the case must be initiated by due process, and any conditions precedent to jurisdiction must be fulfilled. It is impossible for you to argue the question of jurisdiction without referencing or thinking about Madukolu v. Nkemdilim. This is why the case made its way to the top of the list.
2. Lakanmi v. AG West (1971) 1 UILR 201
Some of the features of the military interventions that Nigeria suffered from 1966 to 1999 were the suspension of certain provisions of the Constitution; the instatement of Military Decrees as the supreme law of the land; and the introduction of ouster clauses that severely limited the jurisdiction of courts to challenge and the decisions of the military administrations. One of the early challenges faced by the Nigerian judiciary following the first of such military interventions in 1966 was whether the Military rulers were above the law or whether their actions were subject to judicial review by courts. Lakanmi v. AG West provided the Supreme Court with perhaps the first opportunity to address this question, and the Supreme Court rose to the occasion with a statement judgment on 24 April 1970. It had to take the enactment of Decree No. 28 of 1970, by the Federal Military Government to specifically overturn Lakanmi v. AG West and retroactively validate military decrees and oust the jurisdiction of courts to review them. This decision also gave birth to the famous “doctrine of necessity” which we have since abused and applied to sundry and mundane issues.
I am not a Catholic, but for decades - especially since reading David Yallop’s book, THE POWER AND THE GLORY and Dan Brown’s novel, ANGELS AND DEMONS - I have been intrigued by the Catholic Church. This might not come out well, but for a church steeped in a 2000-year-old tradition, one of the most fascinating Catholic events is the death of a Pope.
When a Pope dies, the world literally stops for a while and the major networks cease their originally scheduled programming for hours, if not days.
Incidentally the last time a sitting Pope died was on 2 April 2005, which means that many have never witnessed the traditions and ceremonies that surround the death and funeral of a Pope. With the passing of Pope Francis today, Easter Monday at the age of 88, I decided to explore this.
In recent times, I have been seeing tweets asking what became of the criminal trial involving Senator Orji Uzor Kalu, former Governor of Abia State, Senator representing Abia North Senatorial Zone and the Senate Chief Whip. Those tweets also piqued my interest and got me digging.
I present to you an intriguing case that raises several questions about the Nigerian criminal justice system. This is merely an informative or, if you like, educative thread and will not involve my personal views. Also, everything here is sourced from publicly available info.
About 16 years ago, precisely in the year 2007, the Federal Republic of Nigeria acting through the EFCC commenced criminal proceedings against Senator Orji Uzor Kalu; Ude Udeogu, former Director of Finance & Accounts; and Slok Nigeria Limited, a company belonging to Senator Kalu.
In the midst of all this negativity brewing all around, I thought it was an opportune moment to recognise one Nigerian for his contributions to the development of this country. That Nigerian is Chief Kanu Godwin Agabi, SAN. And I am only focusing on one aspect, his generosity.
I don't know Chief Agabi SAN personally or rather he doesnt me personally. I have not worked with and/or for him. I have only appeared against him in one case about 7 years ago. But, I have been a beneficiary of his generosity.
During our Law School days in 2011/2012 when man was still hustling, I was posted to a law firm in Asokoro Extension (names withheld @kdaodu please take note) and I heard there was this law firm in Mabushi where they served the students and all staff lunch everyday.
1. For decades, something critical has been missing in the justice delivery system in Nigeria - the lack of clarity regarding the jurisprudential or ideological leanings of our Justices, especially the Law Lords at the Supreme Court. In a way this shouldn't have been a surprise.
2. The best thing a country's justice system can offer the business community is legal certainty. It is secondary if court decisions are wrong, or wrath injustice. What is primary is that the legal community must be able to consistently prophesy with a reasonable degree ...
... of accuracy, what the courts of the country will do when presented with any given situation. One way to achieve that is by being able to decipher the ideological leanings of the Justices, especially of the policy court.
I will start this thread with a quote from a tweet by @OmoGbajaBiamila earlier today, “[d]emocracy guarantees your right to freedom of choice. However, that choice of yours is up for debate, questioning and critique by others, and that's another right guaranteed by democracy.”
The above has become necessary in view of the torrents of abuses that supporters of Mr. Peter Obi now routinely dish out to anyone who exercises a constitutional right to express an opinion against his candidature. These days, that's all it takes to become public enemy No. 1.
The abuses reached their zenith in the days ahead of the PDP presidential primaries before Peter Obi resigned his membership of the PDP. It got to the extent that Mr. Obi had to publicly censure his supporters and urged them to be of better conduct.