Share!
The Supreme Court has ruled against two suits challenging the conduct of court proceedings virtually.
Moyosore Onigbanjo, the Attorney-General (AG) of Lagos state had, in the suit marked SC/CV/260/2020, request the apex court to determine if cases heard over digital platforms are constitutional.
With reference to Section 36(1), (3) and (4) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), Onigbanjo wanted the court to decide if the “use of technology by remote hearings of any kind, whether by Zoom, Microsoft Teams, WhatsApp, Skype or any other audiovisual or video-conference platform by the Lagos state high court or any other courts in Nigeria in aid of hearing and determination of cases are constitutional”.
At the hearing of the suit on Tuesday, the Attorney-General told the court that even though the national assembly were taking steps to tinker with the constitution to allow for virtual court proceedings, the law empowers only the heads of court to regulate the rules of court as provided in section 274.
In the second suit filed, Wale Fapounda, the Attorney-General of Ekiti state challenged the constitutionality of the directive issued by Abubakar Malami, attorney-general of the federation (AGF), to the heads of courts at federal and state levels to adopt virtual court sittings in courts.
However, the seven-man panel of justices of the apex court, delivering its ruling, held that the suit is “immature and speculative”.
The panel said since the bill is yet to go through the second and third reading at the national assembly and is yet to be sent to all assemblies of the 36 states, the court cannot decide on it.
“Can we at this stage speculate the outcome of the national assembly? Even if we can, the amendment must have occurred before the suit matures,” the apex court held.
“Even the devil knows not the intent of a man. Your suit is speculative and it is a fundamental law that we don’t act on speculations. Wait for them to pass the law and see if it will affect your own rules of court.”
The court further added that, “as of today, virtual court sitting is constitutional. This suit is speculative and on that basis, it is struck out.”
In response, the two applicants withdrew the application.
“Having listened and taken the hint of this court, I humbly withdraw the application,” said Onigbanjo.
