Prohibition of Stay of Proceedings in Criminal Litigations under ACJA/EFCC Acts and Speedy Dispensation of Justice: Olisah Metuh V FRN (2017) 5–7 MJSC 83
{"title":"Prohibition of Stay of Proceedings in Criminal Litigations under ACJA/EFCC Acts and Speedy Dispensation of Justice: Olisah Metuh V FRN (2017) 5–7 MJSC 83","authors":"I. Imam, Y. Abdulhamid","doi":"10.1163/17087384-12340054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nConsidering the reality that criminal proceedings suffer unwarranted delay due to spatial of antics habitually utilized by litigants to delay proceedings, this paper explores the judgment of the Supreme Court in Methu v FRN to determine whether, or not, exclusion of stay of proceedings is constitutional. The authors employed mainly doctrinal method, thus library based. It is established that antics and technicalities often employ by litigants/counsel in corruption cases constitute impediment to speedy trial of indicted individual in courts. The judgment under review validates the constitutionality of proscription of stay of proceedings and remedied the unwholesome attitude of litigants/counsel to deliberately delay/frustrate criminal proceedings. Similarly, the risk of denying the state of its synergy to fight corruption vide delay in securing expeditious hearing and trial of cases is extinguished and constitutional right of the accused, the victim of crime and the state to fair hearing within reasonable time reaffirmed. It is concluded that the innovative insertion of prohibition on stay of proceedings in the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) and Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC) Act mechanisms put in place to check delay in prosecuting crime of corruption, and therefore, does not infringe on the fundamental right of an accused person to fair hearing.","PeriodicalId":41565,"journal":{"name":"African Journal of Legal Studies","volume":"12 1","pages":"315-334"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/17087384-12340054","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Journal of Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/17087384-12340054","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Considering the reality that criminal proceedings suffer unwarranted delay due to spatial of antics habitually utilized by litigants to delay proceedings, this paper explores the judgment of the Supreme Court in Methu v FRN to determine whether, or not, exclusion of stay of proceedings is constitutional. The authors employed mainly doctrinal method, thus library based. It is established that antics and technicalities often employ by litigants/counsel in corruption cases constitute impediment to speedy trial of indicted individual in courts. The judgment under review validates the constitutionality of proscription of stay of proceedings and remedied the unwholesome attitude of litigants/counsel to deliberately delay/frustrate criminal proceedings. Similarly, the risk of denying the state of its synergy to fight corruption vide delay in securing expeditious hearing and trial of cases is extinguished and constitutional right of the accused, the victim of crime and the state to fair hearing within reasonable time reaffirmed. It is concluded that the innovative insertion of prohibition on stay of proceedings in the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) and Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC) Act mechanisms put in place to check delay in prosecuting crime of corruption, and therefore, does not infringe on the fundamental right of an accused person to fair hearing.
期刊介绍:
The African Journal of Legal Studies (AJLS) is a peer-reviewed and interdisciplinary academic journal focusing on human rights and rule of law issues in Africa as analyzed by lawyers, economists, political scientists and others drawn from throughout the continent and the world. The journal, which was established by the Africa Law Institute and is now co-published in collaboration with Brill | Nijhoff, aims to serve as the leading forum for the thoughtful and scholarly engagement of a broad range of complex issues at the intersection of law, public policy and social change in Africa. AJLS places emphasis on presenting a diversity of perspectives on fundamental, long-term, systemic problems of human rights and governance, as well as emerging issues, and possible solutions to them. Towards this end, AJLS encourages critical reflections that are based on empirical observations and experience as well as theoretical and multi-disciplinary approaches.