Wakilii

Constitutional Rights Project and Another v Nigeria (Communication 102 of 1993)

African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights · [1998] ACHPR 2 · 1998 Petition Granted — Violations Found AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Communication before the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights alleging human rights violations arising from the annulment of the 12 June 1993 presidential election in Nigeria
Decision
Violations found; Nigeria appealed to release detainees and preserve judicial functions

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The African Commission held that Nigeria violated Articles 1, 6, 9, and 13 of the African Charter by annulling the results of the 12 June 1993 presidential election which international observers had judged free and fair, by detaining protesters without charge, and by proscribing publications and seizing magazines. The annulment violated citizens' right to participate freely in government and the Nigerian people's right to determine their political status. The Commission appealed to Nigeria to release all detainees and preserve the jurisdiction of the courts.

Outcome

Violations found; Nigeria appealed to release detainees and preserve judicial functions

Facts

On 12 June 1993, Nigeria held a presidential election which both foreign and local observers judged free and fair. On 15 June the National Electoral Commission began announcing results from 14 states before being restrained by court order. On 23 June the Federal Military Government annulled the election, alleging irregularities but primarily because the Social Democratic candidate Abiola appeared to have won. Abiola and state governors challenged the annulment in the Supreme Court, but the government promulgated Decrees 39, 41, and 42 of 1993, ousting court jurisdiction, confirming the annulment, and banning the two presidential candidates from future elections. When activists and journalists protested, many were arrested and detained without charge. The News Magazine was proscribed by military decree in June 1993 and 50,000 copies of Tempo magazine were seized by security agents.

Issues

  1. Whether the annulment of the 12 June 1993 presidential election by the Federal Military Government violated the right of Nigerian citizens to participate freely in government under Article 13.1 of the African Charter.
  2. Whether the annulment violated the right of the Nigerian people to freely determine their political status under Article 20.1 of the African Charter.
  3. Whether the detention of activists and journalists without charge following the annulment constituted arbitrary deprivation of liberty in violation of Article 6 of the African Charter.
  4. Whether the proscription of The News Magazine and the seizure of copies of Tempo and The News Magazine violated the right to receive information and to express and disseminate opinions under Article 9 of the African Charter.
  5. Whether local remedies had been exhausted for purposes of admissibility under Article 56 of the African Charter.

Orders

  • A violation of Articles 1, 6, 9 and 13 of the African Charter is held.
  • The Government of Nigeria is appealed to release all those who were detained for protesting against the annulment of the elections.
  • The Government of Nigeria is appealed to preserve the traditional functions of the court by not curtailing their jurisdiction.

Rules and key headnotes

Right to Participate in Government — Free Elections — Annulment of Results
The right to participate freely in government under Article 13.1 of the African Charter entails the right to vote for the representative of one's choice, with the inevitable corollary that the results of free expression of the will of the voters are respected; otherwise the right to vote freely is meaningless. Annulment of election results which reflected the free choice of voters violates Article 13.1.
Self-Determination — Political Status — Electoral Process
The right of a people to determine their political status under Article 20.1 of the African Charter can be interpreted as involving the right of citizens to choose freely those persons or party that will govern them. It is the counterpart of the individual right under Article 13. Where an election is held in conditions adjudged free and fair by international observers, subsequent annulment by the authority in power violates this right of the people.
Liberty and Security of Person — Arbitrary Detention
Where individuals have been detained without charges being brought, particularly over a period of years, this constitutes an arbitrary deprivation of their liberty in violation of Article 6 of the African Charter.
Freedom of Expression — Proscription of Publications — Ad Hominem Legislation
Governmental proscription of a particular publication by name constitutes ad hominem legislation which raises acute danger of discrimination and lack of equal treatment before the law guaranteed by Article 2 of the African Charter. Where national law contains traditional provisions for libel suits, such proscription and the seizure of publications violate Article 9 protecting the right to receive information and to express and disseminate opinions.
General Principle — Restriction of Rights — Rule of Law
Government should avoid restricting rights and take special care with regard to those rights protected by constitutional or international human rights law. No situation justifies the wholesale violation of human rights. General restrictions on rights diminish public confidence in the rule of law and are often counter-productive. Competent authorities should not enact provisions which limit the exercise of fundamental rights or override constitutional provisions or undermine fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution and international human rights standards.
Exhaustion of Local Remedies — Ouster Clauses — Unduly Prolonged
Where military decrees contain ouster clauses specifying that the decree cannot be challenged in national courts, and the Constitution (Modification and Suspension) specifies that even decrees lacking internal ouster clauses cannot be challenged, it is reasonable to presume that domestic remedies will not only be prolonged but are certain to yield no results, and the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies under Article 56 of the African Charter is satisfied.
International Standards — Role of International Observers
A basic premise of international human rights law is that certain standards must be constant across national borders and governments must be held accountable to these standards. The criteria for what constitutes free and fair elections are internationally agreed upon, and international observers are put in place to apply these criteria. It would be contrary to the logic of international law if a national government with a vested interest in the outcome of an election were the final arbiter of whether the election took place in accordance with international standards.

Legislation cited (13)

  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 1
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 2
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 6
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 9
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 13
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 20
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act
  • Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979
  • Constitution (Modification and Suspension)
  • Presidential Election (Basic Constitutional and Transitional Provisions) (Repeal) Decree No. 39 of 1993
  • Decree No. 41 of 1993
  • Transition to Civil Rule (Disqualification and Prohibition of Certain Presidential Aspirants) (Repeal) Decree No. 42 of 1993

Cases cited (3)

  • Communication 129/94
  • Communication 101/93
  • Chief Gani Fawehinmi v General Sani Abacha (Court of Appeal Lagos, 12 December 1996)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Constitutional Rights Project and Another v Nigeria (Communication 102 of 1993) [1998] ACHPR 2 (31 October 1998)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.