Abstract
In 2009, the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure (FREP) Rules of 1979 was revised to ease the cumbersome process encountered by applicants/lawyers in advocating for the enforcement of fundamental human rights in court. Despite this, human rights lawyers still encounter several challenges when representing applicants for the enforcement of fundamental human rights in court. This chapter examines these challenges and adopts primary research method. Data were gathered from human rights lawyers via video conferencing platforms: Skype and Zoom. Findings reveal that issues of procedural rules of court and disrespect for court orders are some of the challenges encountered by human rights lawyers. The chapter recommends that judges should avoid placing unnecessary emphasis on the procedural rules of court. In addition, human rights lawyers and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) should maintain continuous advocacy for the enforcement of fundamental human rights towards holding government and its agencies more accountable for disrespect of court orders.
TopLiterature Review
Access to justice is regarded as a fundamental principle in promoting the rule of law. In the context of human rights, the lack of access to justice creates a barrier against the enforcement of fundamental human rights. To this end, access to justice is essential as an instrument for promoting the principles of fundamental human rights. It is important to underscore that a right without remedy is detrimental to human existence and adversely affects the status of the legal system in a civil society. Shittu (2015) remarks that access to justice is the basic element of any justice system that promotes the human rights of the citizens and serves as a symbol of a civilized society. Access to justice equally entails the processes and procedures of the court and how these determine the final judgments of the court when adjudicating cases between litigants (Muftau, 2016). The lack of access to justice therefore leads to discrimination, inequality, oppression, as well as undue delay in the administration of justice. Conceptually, access to justice is commonly constructed within the scope of the affordability of instituting an action in court as well as having legal representation. In this sense, access to justice is ordinarily viewed from the narrative of indigent members of the society that are vulnerable and lack the financial capabilities to bear the cost of litigation. It is from this perspective that the practice of legal aid and pro bono activism were developed to render legal representation. Access to justice is not comprehensive without an unbiased adjudication process (Omoleye and Eniola, 2018). Crucially, access to justice is an indispensable element in promoting and protecting the human rights of the citizens. In this regard, citizens are able to enforce their rights when they have access to the courts through effective legal representation and a fair hearing anchored on an efficient judicial system. Assuredly, individuals have the leverage to enforce their fundamental rights as guaranteed by the 1999 constitution of Nigeria (as amended) when they have access to justice. Legal representation is aptly provided for in various domestic laws, including the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended). Section 35(2) of the constitution states that:
Key Terms in this Chapter
Enforcement: The act of compelling people to do what is legally mandated.
Constitution: The fundamental laws that regulate the affairs of a nation or an organization.
Court Rules: These are rules that regulate the procedures of a court and determine the processes for entertaining and hearing of cases.
Fundamental Rights: These are rights guaranteed by the constitution and enforced by law.
Access to Justice: The legal right to seek redress in the court of law.
Adjournment: The act or practice of postponing an event or proceeding to a future date.