Previous 1 / 6 Next

2018/1/8 SERAP v. Nigeria, Judgment, ECW/CCJ/APP/12/07; ECW/CCJ/JUD/07/10 (ECOWAS, Nov. 30, 2010) 30 November 2010 Suit No:ECW/CCJ/APP/12/07; Judgment No: ECW/CCJ/JUD/07/10 ECOWAS COMMUNITY COURT OF JUSTICE THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF THE SOCIOECONOMIC RIGHTS AND ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT (SERAP) v. THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA AND UNIVERSAL BASIC EDUCATION COMMISSION (UBEC) JUDGMENT BEFORE: PRESIDENT: Hansine N. Donli JUDGES: Anthony A. Benin; Soumana D. Sidibe PermaLink:http://www.worldcourts.com/ecowas/eng/decisions/2010.11.30_SERAP_v_Nigeria.htm SERAP v. Nigeria, Judgment, ECW/CCJ/APP/12/07; ECW/CCJ/JUD/07/10 Citation: (ECOWAS, Nov. 30, 2010) PLAINTIFF: A. A. Mumuni Esq; Sola Egbeyinka Esq Represented by: DEFENDANTS: Yemi Pitan Esq; Tolu Odupe Esq; John Gaul Esq JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 1. PARTIES AND LAWYERS The paintiff is a human rights nongovernmental organization registered under the laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The first defendant is a member of the Economic Community of West African States. The second defendant is body set up by the first defendant to ensure the success of basic education in the country. The applicant was represented by A. A. Mumuni. and Sola Egbeyinka. The first defendant was. represented by Yemi Pitan and Tolu Odupe. whilst the second defendant was represented by John Gaul. 2. SUBJECTMATTER OF THE PROCEEDINGS The initiating application complains of violation of the human right to quality education, the right to human dignity, the right of peoples to their wealth and natural resources, and the right of people to economic and social development, guaranteed by Article 1.2, 17.21 and 22 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR). FACTS OF THE CASE 3. The genesis of this mater, according to the Applicant is a report of investigations conducted into the activities of the second defendant. Indeed the investigation centred on the mismanagement of funds allocated for basic education in ten states of the Federation of Nigeria. This report was submitted to the Presidency on April 13, 2006. The exact amount though has not been disclosed. 4. Besides, in October 2007, the independent Corrupt Practices Comission (ICPC) reported having more than 488 million naira of funds looted from state offices and headquarters of the second defendant and was still battling to recover another 3.1 billion naira looted by officials of the second Return Home http://www.worldcourts.com/ecowasccj/eng/decisions/2010.11.30_SERAP_v_Nigeria.htm 1/6

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

SERAP v. Nigeria

Judgments

Preview

Country

Nigeria

Rights Involved

Right to development
Right to education

Regional Court

ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States) Court of Justice

Date: Nov 30, 2010

Summary: • The defendants do not contest the fact that every Nigerian child is entitled to free and compulsory basic education. What they earlier on said was that the right to education was not justiciable in Nigeria, but the court in its earlier ruling of 27nd October 2009 in this case, decided it was justiciable under the ACHPR. • The ICPC report provides no conclusive evidence of the facts, and there is no judicial pronouncement on these findings. The conclusive findings of corruption made by ICPC report alone, without more, will not amount to a denial of the right of education. • The Court do not have the power to order the defendants to arrest and prosecute anybody to recover state money.

Primary Documents

SERAP v. Nigeria, Judgment, ECW_CCJ_APP_12_07; ECW_CCJ_JUD_07_10 (ECOWAS, Nov.pdf
english
Download View