What is the Meaning of section 6 subsection six of Nigeria 1999 constitution. In this article I will like to explain the Meaning of section 6 (6) of 1999 constitution

Related article

Meaning of section 6 (5) of 1999 constitution

Meaning of section 6 (4) of 1999 constitution

Meaning of section 6 (3) of 1999 constitution

Meaning of section 6 (6) of 1999 constitution

The section 6 subsection 6 of Nigeria 1999 constitution power of judiciary stated that

Section 6a

The judicial powers vested in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this section ¨C(a) shall extend, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this constitution, to all inherent powers and sanctions of a court of law; 

This legal text is stating that:

1 The judicial powers granted to the courts (as mentioned earlier in the section)

2 Include all the inherent powers and sanctions that a court of law typically has

3 This means that the courts have the authority to:

– Hear and decide cases

– Make judgments and orders

– Impose penalties and sanctions

– Exercise all other powers that a court of law normally has

4 This provision overrides any other part of the constitution that might seem to limit the courts’ powers

In simpler terms, this section is emphasizing that the courts have all the necessary powers to function fully and effectively, even if other parts of the constitution might seem to limit their authority. It’s a way of ensuring that the courts can carry out their duties without any unnecessary restrictions.

The key points of these sections are:

1. Judicial Powers Extend Beyond the Constitution:

– The judicial powers described here apply even if they contradict other parts of the constitution.

– In other words, these judicial powers take precedence over conflicting constitutional provisions.

2. Inherent Powers and Sanctions of a Court:

– The judicial powers include all the inherent powers and sanctions (penalties/consequences) that a court of law typically has.

– This gives the courts broad authority to exercise the full range of powers that are normally associated with a court of law.

In summary, this provision is granting the courts expansive, constitutionally-backed powers that cannot be overridden by other parts of the constitution. It’s empowering the courts to exercise the full scope of judicial authority, regardless of potential conflicts with other constitutional clauses.

The intent seems to be to firmly establish the courts’ powers and ensure they can function effectively without being constrained by potentially contradictory constitutional limitations.

Judicial powers vested: This means the courts have the legal power to handle certain matters.

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary: This is a legal way of saying that even if other parts of the Constitution seem to limit the courts’ power, this part gives them some additional powers.

Inherent powers and sanctions of a court of law: These are the essential authorities courts need to function effectively. This can include things like:

The power to issue orders and enforce them (like requiring someone to appear in court).

The power to punish for contempt of court (if someone disrupts the court proceedings).

The power to manage their own affairs (like setting their schedules or rules).

In simpler terms, this law ensures the courts have the necessary tools to do their job, even if other parts of the Constitution don’t explicitly mention them.

Here’s an analogy: Imagine a chef who is given an oven to cook with. This law is like saying that even though the oven is the main tool, the chef also has the inherent power to use knives, pots, and other tools necessary for cooking, even if they weren’t specifically mentioned

Section 6b

b) shall extend to all matters between persons, or between government or authority and to any person in Nigeria, and to all actions and proceedings relating thereto, for the determination of any question as to the civil rights and obligations of that person; 

This legal text is stating that:

1 The judicial powers of the courts (mentioned earlier)

2 Extend to all types of cases and disputes, including:

– Cases between individuals (persons)

– Cases between the government or any authority and an individual

– Cases related to the rights and obligations of individuals in Nigeria

3 The courts have the power to hear and determine any question or dispute related to:

– Civil rights (such as rights to life, liberty, and property)

– Civil obligations (such as contracts, debts, and liabilities)

In simpler terms, this section is saying that the courts have the authority to handle all types of cases that involve:

– Disputes between individuals

– Disputes between the government or any authority and an individual

– Questions about individual rights and obligations in Nigeria

The courts can hear and decide on any matter that affects a person’s civil rights or obligations, including contracts, debts, property rights, and more.

The judicial powers described here:

1. Apply to All Matters Between People:

– This includes any and all disputes or issues that arise between individual people in Nigeria.

2. Apply to Matters Involving the Government or Authorities:

– These judicial powers extend to any matters or actions involving the government, authorities, or other official bodies in Nigeria.

3. Apply to Determining Civil Rights and Obligations:

– The courts can use these powers to determine and resolve questions about the civil rights and duties of any person in Nigeria.

In essence, this clause is granting the courts very broad jurisdiction. They can exercise these judicial powers to resolve any kind of civil dispute or matter, whether it’s between private citizens, or between citizens and the government or other authorities.

The courts have the ability to make definitive rulings on the civil rights and responsibilities of people in Nigeria, regardless of who the parties involved may be. This gives the judicial system wide-ranging power to adjudicate a vast array of civil issues and controversies.

The intent seems to be to establish the courts as the ultimate arbiter of civil matters, with the ability to make binding decisions that determine the rights and obligations of all people and entities within the country.

This part of the law talks about the broad range of issues these courts can handle.

The courts can hear cases between people and government

People: This means any two individuals or groups in Nigeria can bring a lawsuit against each other in these courts.

Government and People: This allows people to sue the government or other authorities if they believe their rights have been violated.

The cases can involve: Any question about civil rights and obligations: This means the courts can decide on legal disputes involving your rights and responsibilities as a citizen. This could include things like:

Contracts (agreements) between people or businesses

Property disputes (ownership of land or belongings)

Personal injury cases (if someone gets hurt due to someone else’s negligence)

Business disputes

In simpler terms, this law gives these courts the authority to handle a wide variety of legal issues between people and between people and the government, as long as it involves your civil rights and obligations.

Here’s an example: Imagine you sign a contract to buy a car, but the seller doesn’t deliver it. You could take them to one of these courts to sue for breach of contract.

Section 6c

c) shall not, except as otherwise provided by this Constitution, extend to any issue or question as to whether any act or omission by any authority or person or as to whether any law or any judicial decision is in conformity with the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy set out in Chapter II of this Constitution;

This legal text is stating that:

1 The judicial powers of the courts (mentioned earlier)

2 Do not extend to certain types of issues or questions, unless otherwise provided for in the Constitution

3 Specifically, the courts cannot decide on:

– Whether any act or omission (action or inaction) by any authority or person

– Whether any law or judicial decision (court ruling)

– Is in line with the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy (listed in Chapter II of the Constitution)

In simpler terms, this section is saying that the courts cannot review or judge the constitutionality of:

– Government actions or decisions

– Laws passed by the legislature

– Previous court decisions

Based on whether they align with the fundamental objectives and principles outlined in Chapter II of the Constitution, such as:

– Protection of human rights

– Promotion of social justice

– Ensuring accountability and transparency

Unless explicitly allowed by the Constitution, the courts do not have the power to scrutinize these matters.

This clause is placing a limitation on the judicial powers described earlier. Specifically:

1. The judicial powers do not extend to certain issues or questions, except as otherwise provided by the Constitution itself.

2. These excluded issues or questions are ones that involve:

– Whether any act or omission by an authority or person is in conformity with the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy.

– Whether any law or judicial decision is in conformity with the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy.

The Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy are found in Chapter II of the Constitution. This means the courts cannot use the broad judicial powers to rule on whether government actions, laws, or court decisions are aligned with these constitutional principles.

In other words, there is an exception carved out where the courts cannot exercise their wide-ranging authority to evaluate the compliance of official acts, laws, and court rulings with the foundational policy directives laid out in Chapter II of the Constitution.

The intent seems to be to limit the courts’ ability to second-guess or override the government’s adherence to these core constitutional principles, even within the courts’ otherwise expansive jurisdiction. This suggests an effort to maintain a separation of powers between the judicial and other branches of government.

This part of the law deals with what these courts cannot do. Here’s a breakdown:

Courts cannot decide on:

Whether a law, action, or decision violates the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy (Chapter II of the Constitution).

Exceptions: There might be some situations where the courts can still consider these principles, but this law says it’s generally not their job.

Why can’t the courts decide on this?

The Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy are like broad goals for the government, not directly enforceable laws. Imagine them as guidelines for how the government should run the country. Courts typically focus on enforcing specific laws, not these broader goals.

Analogy: Imagine a school with a mission statement to “prepare students for success.” This law is saying that a teacher can’t get fired simply because a student doesn’t feel prepared for a test (unless there’s a specific school rule broken).

It’s important to note:

Even though the courts can’t directly enforce these principles, they might still consider them when making other decisions.

The Constitution might have other parts that give the courts more power in this area.

This is a complex legal concept, and this explanation is a simplified version.

Section 6d

shall not, as from the date when this section comes into force, extend to any action or proceedings relating to any existing law made on or after 15th January, 1966 for determining any issue or question as to the competence of any authority or person to make any such law

This legal text is stating that:

1 From the date this section becomes effective

2 The judicial powers of the courts (mentioned earlier)

3 Do not extend to:

– Any legal action or proceedings

– Related to existing laws made on or after January 15, 1966

– That aim to determine:

– Whether any authority or person had the power to make such laws

– Any issue or question related to the competence of that authority or person

4 After this section comes into force, the courts cannot hear cases that challenge:

– The validity of laws made on or after January 15, 1966

– The authority of the person or body that made those laws

These laws are essentially grandfathered in and cannot be challenged in court on the basis of competence or authority. This provision likely aims to prevent legal uncertainty and ensure stability in the legal system.

This clause is placing another limitation on the judicial powers described earlier. Specifically:

1. The judicial powers do not extend to any actions or proceedings related to existing laws made on or after January 15, 1966.

2. This restriction applies to laws that are meant for determining any issue or question about the competence (legal authority) of any person or entity to make such a law.

In essence, this clause exempts a certain category of laws from the broad judicial powers outlined previously. Specifically, it excludes laws created on or after January 15, 1966 that are intended to resolve questions about whether the relevant authorities had the legal competence or authority to enact those laws in the first place.

The courts cannot use their expansive judicial powers to evaluate the validity or legality of these particular types of laws. This suggests an effort to insulate certain legislative actions from judicial review, at least with regards to the competence of the lawmakers.

The intent seems to be to limit the courts’ ability to second-guess or override the government’s own determinations about the legal authority of authorities to create specific laws, even within the courts’ otherwise wide-ranging jurisdiction.

This part of the law deals with a specific situation and limits the power of the courts in a particular way. Here’s a breakdown:

After this section is enacted: This means once this part of the Constitution becomes law.

The courts cannot handle cases about:

The authority (power) of someone or something to create a law.

This applies specifically to laws created after January 15th, 1966.

Why is this limited?

This is likely to prevent legal challenges based on who has the authority to make laws. It streamlines the legal process by assuming whoever made the law after that date had the proper power to do so.

Here’s an analogy: Imagine a company where the CEO has the power to make decisions. This law is saying that after a certain date, employees can’t challenge the CEO’s authority to make those decisions, they can only challenge the decisions themselves.

Important to note:

This only applies to laws created after a specific date. Laws made before January 15th, 1966 might still be challenged based on who had the authority to make them.

There might be other parts of the Constitution that allow the courts to review a law’s validity even under this section (e.g., if the law violates fundamental rights).

This is a specific legal detail, and this explanation is a simplified version.

What is the Meaning of section 6 subsection five of Nigeria 1999 constitution. In this article I will like to explain the Meaning of section 6 (5) of 1999 constitution

Related article

Meaning of section 6 (4) of 1999 constitution

Meaning of section 6 (3) of 1999 constitution

Meaning of section 6 (2) of 1999 constitution

Meaning of section 6 (5) of 1999 constitution

The section 6 subsection 5 of Nigeria 1999 constitution power of judiciary stated that

This section relates to- (a) the Supreme Court of Nigeria; (b) the Court of Appeal; (c) the Federal High Court; (cc) the National Industrial Court (d) the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja; (e) a High Court of a State (f) the Sharia Court of Appeal of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja; (g) a Sharia Court of Appeal of a State; (h) the Customary Court of Appeal of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja; (i) a Customary Court of Appeal of a State; (j) such other courts as may be authorised by law to exercise jurisdiction on matters with respect to which the National Assembly may make laws; and (k) such other courts as may be authorised by law to exercise jurisdiction at first instance or on appeal on matters with respect to which a House of Assembly may make laws.

This section is listing the various types of courts in Nigeria that this legal provision applies to.

– The highest courts:

– Supreme Court of Nigeria

– Court of Appeal

– Federal courts:

– Federal High Court

– National Industrial Court

– State courts:

– High Court of a State

– Sharia Court of Appeal of a State (for Islamic law matters)

– Customary Court of Appeal of a State (for traditional law matters)

– Special courts:

– High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (for the capital city)

– Sharia Court of Appeal of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (for Islamic law matters in the capital city)

– Customary Court of Appeal of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (for traditional law matters in the capital city)

– Other courts that may be established by law to handle specific matters, including:

– Courts authorized by the National Assembly to handle federal matters

– Courts authorized by a State House of Assembly to handle state matters

In simpler terms, this section is saying that this legal provision applies to all the different types of courts in Nigeria, including the highest courts, federal courts, state courts, special courts, and any other courts that may be established by law to handle specific types of cases.

So in summary, this section lays out the specific superior courts of record that are being established by the constitution, covering the federal-level courts as well as the courts at the state level. It also allows for the creation of additional courts by the legislative bodies, as long as they operate within the jurisdictions defined.

The key point is that this section comprehensively defines the judicial system structure in Nigeria, from the top-level Supreme Court down to additional courts that can be added as needed by the federal and state governments.

Function of these Court

Supreme Court of Nigeria: The highest court in the land.

Court of Appeal: Hears appeals from lower courts.

Federal High Court: Deals with federal government cases and certain other matters.

National Industrial Court: Handles disputes related to labor and employment.

High Courts: Means Each state has its own High Court, which is the highest court in that state.

Sharia Court of Appeal: Means Handles appeals in matters related to Islamic law in some areas.

Customary Court of Appeal: Means Deals with appeals in matters based on traditional laws and customs in some areas.

(j) and (k): These sections allow for the creation of additional courts:

(j): The National Assembly (federal legislature) can create new courts to handle matters they have the power to make laws about.

(k): Each state’s House of Assembly can create new courts to handle matters they have the power to make laws about.

Important points to remember:

The courts listed in (a) to (i) are the main ones established by the Constitution.

The courts created under (j) and (k) must have less power than the ones listed in (a) to (i). These are called “courts of subordinate jurisdiction.”

What is the Meaning of section 6 subsection three of Nigeria 1999 constitution. In this article I will like to explain the Meaning of section 6 (3) of 1999 constitution

Related article

Meaning of section 6 (2) of 1999 constitution

Meaning of section 6 (1) of 1999 constitution

Meaning of section 5 (5) of 1999 constitution

Meaning of section 6 (3) of 1999 constitution

The section 6 subsection 3 of Nigeria 1999 constitution power of judiciary stated that

The courts to which this section relates established by this Constitution for the Federation and for the States, specified in subsection (5) (a) to (i) of this section, shall be the only superior courts of record in Nigeria; and save as otherwise prescribed by the National Assembly or by the House of Assembly of a State, each court shall have all the powers of a superior court of record

Here’s a simplified breakdown of this section

1 The courts mentioned in this section (Federal and State courts) are the highest courts in the land.

2 These courts are the only ones with the authority to make and enforce laws.

3 Each of these courts has the power to:

– Hear and decide cases

– Make judgments

– Enforce their decisions

– Review and overturn lower court decisions

In essence, this section is setting up the supreme courts at the federal and state levels as the ultimate authorities in Nigeria’s judicial system.

1. The courts listed in subsections (5)(a) to (5)(i) are the only superior courts of record in Nigeria.

“Superior courts of record” means these are the highest-level courts that have the authority to make rulings that are officially recorded.

2. Except for any changes made by the National Assembly (the federal legislature) or the State House of Assembly, each of these courts will have all the powers and authorities of a superior court of record.

So in summary, this section is outlining the structure of the court system in Nigeria, stating that the courts listed are the top-level courts with full judicial powers, and that their powers and jurisdictions can only be modified by the national or state legislatures, not any other means.

The key point is that this establishes a clear hierarchy and limits to the court system, ensuring there is a defined set of superior courts with established authorities as laid out in the constitution.

This law is about establishing courts in Nigeria.

It says there are specific courts listed in subsection (5) that are the most important courts (superior courts). These courts are created by the Constitution itself for both the federal government and the states.

There can be other courts created, but these superior courts are the most important ones.

These superior courts have the power to keep official records of their cases (courts of record).

The National Assembly (federal legislature) and the State Houses of Assembly (state legislatures) can make some exceptions to these rules, but generally, these superior courts have a lot of authority.

In short, this law sets up the main court system in Nigeria, with superior courts handling important cases.

What is the Meaning of section 6 subsection two of Nigeria 1999 constitution. In this article I will like to explain the Meaning of section 6 (2) of 1999 constitution

Related article

Meaning of section 6 (1) of 1999 constitution

Meaning of section 5 (5) of 1999 constitution

Meaning of section 5 (4) of 1999 constitution

Meaning of section 6 (2) of 1999 constitution

The section 6 subsection 2 of Nigeria 1999 constitution power of judiciary stated that

The judicial powers of a State shall be vested in the courts to which this section relates, being courts established, subject as provided by this Constitution, for a State

This clause is Means that:

1 The power to interpret and apply the laws of a State is granted to the courts established by that State.

2 These courts are responsible for administering justice and resolving legal disputes within the State.

3 Each State has its own court system, established by the State, to handle legal matters specific to that State.

4 These courts have the authority to make binding decisions on State laws and disputes, ensuring consistency and uniformity in the application of State laws within that State.

This clause establishes the state judiciary as a separate and independent branch of government at the State level, responsible for upholding the rule of law and ensuring access to justice within the State. It also highlights the constitutional framework that governs the establishment and operation of State courts.

Here is the breakdown of this section

Judicial Powers: This refers to the authority to settle legal disputes and interpret laws.

State: This refers to a specific region or territory within a federal country.

Vested in the Courts: This means the responsibility for legal matters is given to the courts.

Courts to which this section relates: Similar to the previous law, this refers to specific courts mentioned in this section of the constitution (which may not be shown here). These courts will have the judicial power for the state.

Established for the State: These are courts created by the state government, not the federal government.

Subject as provided by this Constitution: This means the state courts’ power might have some limitations outlined elsewhere in the constitution.

To put it simply, this law says that courts set up by a state government have the authority to handle legal issues within that state, following any restrictions laid out in the constitution.

This section is defining where the judicial powers of the individual Nigerian states are vested:

“The judicial powers of a State shall be vested in the courts to which this section relates, being courts established, subject as provided by this Constitution, for a State.”

In simpler terms, this means:

The authority and responsibility to exercise judicial power on behalf of each individual Nigerian state is granted to the courts that are established at the state level, rather than at the federal level.

The key points of these sections are:

1. Judicial Powers Vested in State Courts

– The judicial powers of each individual Nigerian state government are given to the courts that are set up and operate at the state level, not the federal courts.

2. State Courts Established by Constitution

– These state-level courts exercising judicial power must be ones that have been established in accordance with the provisions laid out in the Nigerian Constitution.

3. Subordinate to Federal Constitution

– While the states have their own judicial systems, these state courts and their powers are still subject to and constrained by the overarching federal Constitution.

So in essence, this clause establishes that the judicial branch of the government at the state level, with the power to interpret and apply the law within that state, resides in the system of courts set up specifically for each individual Nigerian state. However, the state judicial powers are still ultimately subordinate to the federal Constitution.