THE LEGALITY OF OUSTER CLAUSES UNDER THE NIGERIAN LEGAL SYSTEM: A LESSON FROM INDIA

Abstract

Ouster clause is any provision of law which excludes the jurisdiction of the courts to question the actions of individuals or public officials and institutions. It precludes an aggrieved person from approaching the courts to either enforce his rights or to ventilate his grievances. Although ouster clauses are clearly inconsistent with the fundamental norms of democracy including rule of law; Nigerian statute books are littered with these vestiges of military rule. This paper examined the legality of ouster clauses under Nigerian legal system and the attitudes of Nigerian courts towards them. The research methodology adopted by the researcher is purely doctrinal, whereas analytical, descriptive and prescriptive approaches were employed. This paper found that ouster clauses in statutes other than the Constitution are void ab initio because the jurisdiction of superior courts cannot be ousted by means of ordinary statutes.1As for ouster provisions in the Constitution itself, it is recommended that a teleological approach should be adopted by Nigerian courts like their Indian counterparts in dealing with them to ensure that their application does not defeat the ultimate purpose of the Constitution in a constitutional democracy like Nigeria.