*
The directive bans courts of coordinate jurisdiction meddling in matters outside their jurisdiction
*Fderal and FCT High Courts now to hear cases requiring cross-jurisdiction
By Ezechukwu Chidozie
The National Judicial Council (NJC), has issued Policy Directions on Political and Election Related Cases to heads of courts in the country.
This is part of concerted efforts to eliminate drastically, incidences of issuance of conflicting orders and judgments capable of distrupting the on-going electioneering process.
The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad, presided over a meeting wheres the policy directions were formulated, according to Barr. Soji Oye, the Director, Information at the NJC.
Under the new directive, heads of courts are henceforth to be held responsible for lapses in their areas of jurisdiction.
Oye on Wednesday in Abuja stated that the policy direction was formulated at the 98th meeting of the NJC held on 10th and 11th of May, under the Chairmanship of the CJN, Justice Muhammad.
He stated: “Pursuant to the powers vested in the National Judicial Council by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Schedule III, Part I, 21 (i), a new policy direction is hereby issued.
“These Policy Directions shall apply to all suits filed in any court in Nigeria wherein the parties include Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), any political party or its officers, any other person, natural or legal, suing or sued for a declaration in relation to any action taken or to compel or restrain any action or omission with respect to the affairs of a political party or any election into a public office.
“These Directions seek to: prevent the multiplicity of litigations at different courts of coordinate jurisdiction across the nation, resulting in conflicting orders on the same issues and facts;
“Recognise that courts need to embrace prudential limitations on their powers with a view to curtailing the incidences of unscrupulous forum shopping disrupting the administration of justice and the democratic process; and
“Acknowledge that the circumstances necessitate further administrative measures and procedures to complement and support the judicial process.
“All suits to which these Policy Directions apply shall be filed, received, or entertained only at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory in so far as the relief sought, or potential consequential order(s) or declaration(s) may restrain or compel persons or actions beyond the territorial jurisdiction of any one State;
“Where such suits are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court, they shall be filed or received at Abuja and assigned by the Chief Judge of the Court;
“All such suits wherein the cause of action arose in a state and the relief seeks a declaration or to compel or restrain person(s), natural or legal, within that dtate’s territory, with no consequence outside the state, shall be filed, received, or heard only in that state;
“All Heads of Court shall assign cases or constitute panels with a view to forestalling the incidences of conflicting judgements and rulings;
“Once facts or issues have been ruled upon, no other court or panel of coordinate jurisdiction shall be assigned or entertain suits on the same subject matter and parties shall comply or proceed on appeal to the appropriate higher Court;
“Rules of court shall require sufficient notice and publicity of actions that potentially impact other cases;
“Rules of court shall stipulate solemn disclosure duties on litigants filing actions that may impact other actions.
“Heads of court shall exercise their rule making and administrative powers to give effect to these policy directions.
