Admin I Wednesday, May 14, 2025
OSBORNE, Ikoyi – Lawyers Alert Initiative, a not for profit human rights organization based in Makurdi has lost its bid to stop arbitrary arrest and detention of vulnerable groups, including sex workers in Northern Nigeria at the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice.
This followed the decision of the court to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction due to the absence of identifiable victims.
Designated as Suit No: ECW/CCJ/APP/25/21, this case represents the Court’s inaugural judgment under the 2020 Practice Direction on Electronic Case Management and Virtual Hearings, a landmark advancement hailed for enhancing regional judicial efficiency.
The Lawyers Alert Initiative—a prominent non-profit human rights organization headquartered in Makurdi, Benue State, and Abuja—sought a declaration from the Court that certain provisions of Nigeria’s Penal Code (1963) and Criminal Code (1961), specifically Sections 401, 405(1)(c), 405, 246, 224, and 250, operate as vagrancy laws permitting the arbitrary arrest and detention of vulnerable groups, including sex workers.
The organization contended that these laws egregiously violate multiple provisions of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, including Articles 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12, 18, and 19.
However, in a decisive and unanimous ruling delivered by Hon. Justice Ricardo Goncalves, Hon. Justice Sengu M. Koroma, and Hon. Justice Edward Asante, the Court reaffirmed its jurisdiction over human rights violations in member states under Article 9(4) of its Protocol. Nonetheless, it concluded that the applicant failed to provide evidence of any specific or identifiable individuals who had suffered violations due to the contested laws.
The Court stated, “The application amounts to a generalized and theoretical challenge to national legislation,” underscoring that its jurisdiction requires a prima facie case of actual human rights violations rather than speculative or abstract claims. It made it clear that an “abstract review of national legislation” falls beyond its jurisdiction unless directly tied to real-life cases supported by documented victims.
The submission presented by the applicant included general statistics and reports on petty offenses in Nigeria for 2022 and 2023.
However, the Court found these materials insufficient, as they lacked sworn affidavits, judicial decisions, or news reports that could identify specific individuals subjected to prosecution or adversely affected by the challenged provisions.
Citing precedents such as the Hissène Habré case and other ECOWAS rulings, the Court emphatically reiterated that its mandate is not to provide advisory opinions on national legislation but to decisively adjudicate actual breaches of international human rights obligations.
In its final order, the Court unambiguously dismissed the case in its entirety, asserting a clear lack of jurisdiction to entertain the matter.
Both parties were directed to bear the cost.
