Navigating the Complex Terrain of Competition Law Enforcement in Nigeria’s Petroleum Sector: an Examination of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL)

by | Jan 19, 2025 | JCLA, JCLA V11 I2 2024

Navigating the Complex Terrain of Competition Law Enforcement in Nigeria’s Petroleum Sector: an Examination of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL)

Author: Laura Ani

ISSN: 2521-2605
Affiliations: Senior Research Fellow, Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies (NIALS)
Source: Journal of Comparative Law in Africa, Volume 11 Issue 2, p. 109 – 141
https://doi.org/10.47348/JCLA/v11/i2a4

Abstract

The convergence of the Petroleum Industry Act of 2021 and the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act of 2018 offers a unique opportunity to reshape the Nigerian Oil and Gas sector. However, the true potential of these legislative reforms can only be realised through vigilant enforcement. This article comprehensively analyses the critical role of competition law in fostering a dynamic and competitive energy sector in Nigeria. By immersing into the labyrinth of competition law, this article distils the challenges and opportunities arising from the convergence of the Petroleum Industry Act and the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act. Additionally, the article expounds upon how a proactive stance by the NNPCL, within the ambit of competition compliance, can infuse dynamism into market dynamics and, ultimately, rebound to the collective economic well-being of Nigeria. The methodology involves a desktop review of laws and regulations pertinent to competition and petroleum. The aim is to assess the influence of these laws on market competitiveness, consumer welfare, and economic efficiency within the Nigerian petroleum industry. The article finds that though the dominance of the NNPCL is not problematic per se, the ownership structure of the NNPCL is an impetus for the government to undesirably influence the entity’s autonomy to compete like other undertakings. If left unchecked, it could potentially affect smaller private competitors in the industry. The article recommends more robust regulatory compliance to ensure fair competition and prevent the abuse of the NNPCLs dominant position.

Evaluating the Efficacy of Alternative Dispute Resolution Methods in Resolving Marital Conflicts in Nigeria

by | Jan 19, 2025 | JCLA, JCLA V11 I2 2024

Evaluating the Efficacy of Alternative Dispute Resolution Methods in Resolving Marital Conflicts in Nigeria

Author: Solomon O. Afolabi

ISSN: 2521-2605
Affiliations: LLB (Hons) Ife, BL, LLM (ABU), MBA (Unilorin), PhD (ABU), Associate Professor of Private & Property Law, University of Ilorin, Nigeria
Source: Journal of Comparative Law in Africa, Volume 11 Issue 2, p. 142 – 168
https://doi.org/10.47348/JCLA/v11/i2a5

Abstract

Disputes may be a fact of life, but they are no less troubling when they occur. They often need resolution, and swift, meaningful resolution at that. While litigation is the most popular means of settling disputes, this paper appraises the application of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms to marital conflicts in Nigeria. In Nigeria, litigation which is the most common means of settling disputes is often inadequate for the settlement of marital conflicts for the simple reason that it is rarely personal, empathic or collaborative for that matter. This paper therefore appraises the nature and extent of the application of ADR mechanisms to marital conflicts and also tests the proposition that a ‘cause and effect’ relationship exists between ADR and healthy marriages. The paper adopts doctrinal and empirical approaches by leveraging on qualitative analysis of responses to structured questions administered to participants within the Ilorin metropolis, Kwara State, Nigeria. The paper finds that there is an overwhelming use of ADR mechanisms for the settlement of marital conflicts, albeit with most leaning towards non-institutional ADR mechanisms, and that a ‘cause and effect’ relationship does exist between ADR and healthy marriages. This paper recommends that more importance be given to ADR in the place of settlement of marital conflicts and that better awareness be made in respect to institutional ADR mechanisms in Nigeria. The work also recommends that serious consideration be given to the establishment of family courts that would operate using collaborative approaches unique to ADR mechanisms.

Le Droit au Juge Naturel en Droit Camerounais

by | Jan 19, 2025 | JCLA, JCLA V11 I2 2024

Le Droit au Juge Naturel en Droit Camerounais

Author: Tchabo Sontang

ISSN: 2521-2605
Affiliations: Maitre de Conférences, Droit privé, FSJP-UDs. Membre de l’URDIIC
Source: Journal of Comparative Law in Africa, Volume 11 Issue 2, p. 169 – 188
https://doi.org/10.47348/JCLA/v11/i2a6

Abstract

A fair trial presupposes, among other things, that the judgment is pronounced by a court and/or an independent and impartial judge. In any state based on the idea of the rule of law, justice must be organized in such a way as to be stripped of any risk of serious grievance affecting its neutrality or that of the judges. It is on objective bases that the assignment of a court or a judge to a case must be made. The litigant must have for judge the one whom the law alone has established, his natural judge. Their meeting should not result from manipulation or a particular arrangement, but result from the implementation of criteria specially predefined by the legislator, taking into account the equality of citizens before the law and justice. These principles are indeed in force in Cameroonian law, although mistreated in their implementation.

The Need for Effective Implementation of the Nigeria Anti-Torture Act, 2017

by | Jan 19, 2025 | JCLA, JCLA V11 I2 2024

The Need for Effective Implementation of the Nigeria Anti-Torture Act, 2017

Author: Ayo-Ojo Bayode Sunday

ISSN: 2521-2605
Affiliations: LLB (Kenyatta), LLM (KwaZulu-Natal), LLD (Pretoria)
Source: Journal of Comparative Law in Africa, Volume 11 Issue 2, p. 189 – 208
https://doi.org/10.47348/JCLA/v11/i2a7

Abstract

The Anti-Torture Act 2017 prohibits torture without exceptions for government or military officials, including during emergencies and war, and imposes consequences on those who commit acts of torture. Those who carry out torture can face up to 25 years of imprisonment. Accordingly, the effectiveness of the Act must be measured by its effectiveness in ending torture by government and military officials. This article aims to assess the effective implementation of the Anti-Torture Act 2017. In doing so, the article questions whether any perpetrator has been punished in accordance with s 9 of the Act or whether detainees have access to medical examinations as specified in s 7 of the Act. This article analyses the need to effectively implement the Nigeria Anti-Torture Act 2017. Thus, this article finds that, in reality, there is no record of the punishment of any perpetrator under the Anti-Torture Act 2017, nor has the Attorney-General of the Federation provided any additional regulations to ensure its practical applications.

A Critical Review of Jurisprudence on the Adjudication of Presidential Election Petitions in Africa

by | Jul 28, 2024 | JCLA, JCLA V11 I1 2024

A Critical Review of Jurisprudence on the Adjudication of Presidential Election Petitions in Africa

Author: Justice Mavedzenge

ISSN: 2521-2605
Affiliations: PhD Constitutional Law (UCT), LLM Constitutional and Administrative Law (UCT), LLB (UNISA), BA (MSU). Adjunct Senior Lecturer of Public Law Research Fellow, Faculty of Law, University of Cape Town
Source: Journal of Comparative Law in Africa, Volume 11 Issue 1, p. 1 – 30
https://doi.org/10.47348/JCLA/v11/i1a1

Abstract

A survey of jurisprudence on the adjudication of presidential election petitions in Africa yields different and sometimes confusing results on the legal approaches that are being applied by courts in different jurisdictions to determine the standard of proof which a petitioner must discharge and the nature of violations which a petitioner must prove in order for the court to vitiate an election. This is despite the fact that most of these countries share similar legal frameworks in the sense that their rules of evidence are similar while their constitutions require elections to be conducted in a way which adheres to the principles of universal suffrage, free suffrage, equal suffrage and secret suffrage. The emergence of divergent views and positions among courts which operate on the basis of a similar legal framework reflects a lack of coherence in the emerging African jurisprudence on the adjudication of presidential election petitions. What then is the appropriate standard of proof which the petitioner must discharge in a presidential election petition, and what kind of violations should a petitioner prove in order for the court to vitiate an election? In an attempt to contribute towards strengthening the role of the courts in resolving election disputes, this paper suggests that the approach to be taken by courts when adjudicating election petitions should very much depend on the case that has been presented by the petitioner. Where the petitioner is alleging irregularities and is claiming that those irregularities affected the results of the election, the question that must be examined by the court is the extent to which the results were affected. Where the petitioner’s challenge is directed at the integrity of the election process, the question to be examined by the court should be the extent to which the integrity of the process was violated.

A Comparative Analysis of the Right to Protest Under the Nigerian Public Order Act and the South African Regulation of Gatherings Act

by | Jul 28, 2024 | JCLA, JCLA V11 I1 2024

A Comparative Analysis of the Right to Protest Under the Nigerian Public Order Act and the South African Regulation of Gatherings Act

Author: Cyril Ekeke

ISSN: 2521-2605
Affiliations: LLB, BL (Nigeria) LLM, LLD (Pretoria), Senior Lecturer, Federal College of Education, Rivers State, Nigeria
Source: Journal of Comparative Law in Africa, Volume 11 Issue 1, p. 31 – 83
https://doi.org/10.47348/JCLA/v11/i1a2

Abstract

The handling of the #EndSARS protests in 2020 and 2021 by the Nigerian authorities has once again brought to the fore the restriction of the right to protest in Nigeria, and in Africa as a whole, and the need to compare the right to protest under various African jurisdictions. Protest can be the catalyst for positive change in the social, political, economic and cultural life of a country, and therefore the right to protest is guaranteed under international, regional African and domestic human rights legal frameworks. In Nigeria, the Public Order Act of 1990 is designed to give effect to the provisions of the Constitution in terms of the appropriate and peaceful conduct of protests. Likewise in South Africa, the Regulation of Gatherings Act 205 of 1993 regulates the holding of public gatherings and demonstrations, in alignment with the provisions of the Constitution. This paper applies doctrinal methodology to undertake a comparative study of the right to protest under the Nigerian Public Order Act and the South African Regulation of Gatherings Act, specifically because South Africa has seen a groundswell of protests in the past few years with minimal restrictions. This paper finds that despite some shortfalls in the Regulation of Gatherings Act, it is a more potent law than the Public Order Act in ensuring the right to protest. This paper further argues that the robustness of the Regulation of Gatherings Act could serve as a template for strengthening the Nigerian Public Order Act to fully guarantee the right to protest in Nigeria.