Author Archives: Timmyspeakslaw

INTRODUCTION

Abortion is one of Nigeria’s most controversial legal and moral debates, cutting across religion, culture, women’s rights, and public health. Even though Nigeria is a deeply religious society with strict anti-abortion laws and heavy social stigma, abortions still happen frequently and most times it happens unsafely in secret. The abortion debate in Nigeria is essentially a collision between two powerful ideologies, the pro-life position, rooted in faith, morality, and protection of unborn life; and the reproductive rights position, focused on women’s autonomy, healthcare, and personal liberty. This presents challenging issues and questions like whether religious morality is the only thing the law should represent? Whether a woman in charge of her own reproductive system? Whether a women’s rights, health, and dignity coexist with unborn children’s right to life? the Nigerian abortion debate still revolves majorly around these issues.

STATUTORY PROVISIONS FOR ABORTION

Nigeria’s abortion laws are among the most restrictive in the world, primarily governed by two distinct sets of laws inherited from British colonial rule. These laws create a fragmented legal landscape based on geography. Section 33(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) guarantees the right to life. Many anti-abortion advocates argue that unborn children deserve constitutional protection as human life begins at conception.

The Criminal Code (Southern Nigeria)

In the Southern states the Criminal Code govern abortion, Section 228 provides that any person (typically a medical provider) who attempts to procure a miscarriage is liable to 14 years of imprisonment. Section 229 provides thata woman who attempts to procure her own miscarriage is liable to 7 years of imprisonment. Section 230 provides thatanyone who supplies drugs or instruments intended to cause an abortion is liable to 3 years of imprisonment.

The Penal Code (Northern Nigeria)

In the Northern states, Sections 232, 233, and 234 of the Penal Code mirror these restrictions but include a specific exception: abortion is permitted only to save the life of the mother. While the Criminal Code does not explicitly state this exception, Nigerian courts have historically adopted the precedent from the English case Rex v. Bourne (1939), which allows for abortion to preserve the woman’s physical or mental health.

Despite the strict criminalization, Nigerian law recognizes limited exceptions.

1.   Saving the Life of the Mother: The clearest legal exception permits abortion where it is necessary to save the life of the pregnant woman. Under the Penal Code, this exception is expressly stated. Under the Criminal Code, the exception is implied through the use of the word “unlawfully.” Courts and legal scholars have interpreted this to mean that abortions carried out in good faith to preserve the life of the mother may be lawful. This interpretation draws from the English case of R v Bourne, which has influenced Nigerian legal reasoning.

2.   Therapeutic/Mental Health Necessity: Some legal commentators argue that Section 297 of the Criminal Code further supports therapeutic abortion where medical intervention becomes necessary to preserve the woman’s life or health. However, the law remains vague and narrow, creating fear among medical practitioners who worry about criminal prosecution.

THE JUDICIAL SHIFT: LANDMARK CASES AND PRECEDENT

The Nigerian judiciary has recently started linking reproductive health to human rights through two major legal milestones:

• A Groundbreaking 2025 Ruling: In RJIF v. Federal Government, the Federal High Court in Abuja ruled that forced, unplanned pregnancies from rape or incest violate a woman’s right to physical and mental health. This was the first time a major Nigerian court recognized “mental well-being” as a legal reason for safe abortion.
• The ECOWAS Challenge: In late 2024, the NGO Lawyers Alert petitioned the ECOWAS Court, arguing that Nigeria’s strict anti-abortion laws (Sections 228–230 of the Criminal Code) violate the Maputo Protocol. Nigeria signed this protocol in 2004, which explicitly requires states to allow safe abortions in cases of rape, incest, sexual assault, or when the mother’s mental or physical health is at risk.

THE PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS: THE COST OF RESTRICTION

The disconnect between the law and the reality of women’s lives has led to a burgeoning public health emergency. Despite the threat of imprisonment, the number of abortions in Nigeria has risen from 1.25 million in 2012 to an estimated 2.8 million in 2023. Unsafe abortion remains a leading cause of maternal death. In 2025, the Society of Gynaecology and Obstetrics of Nigeria (SOGON) reported that 13% of maternal deaths in Lagos were the direct result of unsafe procedures. Wealthier women often access “safe” but illegal procedures in private clinics, while women in rural or low-income areas resort to dangerous methods, such as the ingestion of toxic substances or the insertion of foreign objects like bicycle spokes and twigs.

THE BATTLE OF FAITH: RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVES

Nigeria is a country where religion, specifically Christianity and Islam, permeates every aspect of public life. This “Faith Factor” is the strongest barrier to legal reform. Both Christianity and Islam generally uphold the sanctity of human life and condemn the termination of pregnancy except under extreme circumstances.

The Christian Perspective

The Christian stance in Nigeria is predominantly anti-abortion (pro-life), driven largely by the influential Catholic Church and rapidly growing Pentecostal denominations. Most Nigerian Christians oppose abortion based on three main views:

• Life Begins at Conception: Based on biblical verses like Jeremiah 1:5, Christians believe a fetus is a human being with a soul from day one, making abortion equivalent to taking a life.
• The Strict Catholic View: The Catholic Church allows absolutely zero exceptions. Abortion is considered a grave sin, even in tragic cases like rape, incest, or severe fetal abnormalities.
• The Pentecostal & Protestant View: Evangelical and Pentecostal ministries strongly condemn abortion as a moral failure. However, some mainline Protestant groups quietly accept it if it’s the only way to save the mother’s life.

The Islamic Perspective

The Islamic perspective, governed by Sharia law, is also generally restrictive but is often more legally flexible and structured around timelines than mainstream Nigerian Christianity. The Islamic perspective on abortion centers around a timeline of three main points:

• The 120-Day Rule (“Ensoulment”): Islamic tradition teaches that a fetus receives its soul at 120 days (around 4 months) of pregnancy, making a clear distinction between the stages before and after this mark.
• Before 120 Days: While abortion is discouraged for casual reasons, scholars (especially from the Maliki school common in Northern Nigeria) allow it for serious reasons, such as rape, incest, severe fetal abnormalities, or threats to the mother’s health.
• After 120 Days: Once the fetus has a soul, it is considered a full human being, and abortion is strictly banned. The only exception is to save the mother’s life, which is always prioritized because of her established role and responsibilities in society.

The Human Rights Perspective

Human rights advocates point out that banning abortion doesn’t stop it from happening, it just forces women into dangerous, back-alley procedures by unqualified people. This disproportionately harms poor and vulnerable women and drives up Nigeria’s maternal death rates. Reformers argue that forcing women to carry pregnancies caused by rape, incest, severe fetal abnormalities, or medical emergencies violates rights already guaranteed by the Nigerian Constitution and international treaties, specifically, the right to dignity, the right to health, the right to privacy, and the right to freedom from cruel or degrading treatment

THE WAY FORWARD

Nigeria must approach the abortion debate with sensitivity, balance, and realism rather than emotional extremism, some way forward includes:

CONCLUSION

The debate in Nigeria is moving toward a recognition that total criminalization does not stop abortions; it only stops safe abortions. As 2026 progresses, advocacy groups continue to push for the domestication of the Maputo Protocol to ensure that the rights of rape and incest survivors are not just theoretical but accessible in every hospital. Reforming Nigeria’s abortion laws is no longer just a “feminist issue” it is a necessity for national development and the preservation of human life. Until the law aligns with the medical and social realities of the 21st century, the silent toll of unsafe abortions will continue to be paid by the nation’s most vulnerable women.

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, one word has come to define the aspirations, frustrations, and survival instincts of many young Nigerians: “Japa.” The term, now deeply embedded in Nigeria’s social vocabulary which refers to the mass migration of professionals seeking better economic opportunities, security, education, and quality of life abroad. Doctors, nurses, software developers, lawyers, engineers, lecturers, bankers, and even artisans are leaving Nigeria in significant numbers. In response, many employers have begun tightening employment contracts by introducing strict “Training Bond Agreements,” “Non-compete Clauses,” and other restrictive employment terms aimed at discouraging employees from leaving after acquiring skills or certifications funded by the company. This has triggered a critical legal question: “Can an employer legally force an employee to remain in employment or pay huge sums simply because the employee wants to relocate abroad?”

UNDERSTANDING TRAINING BONDS AND NON-COMPETE CLAUSES

1. Training Bond Agreements

A training bond is a contractual arrangement where an employer sponsors an employee’s training, certification, or education on the condition that the employee remains with the company for a specified period. If the employee leaves before that period expires, the employer may demand reimbursement of the training expenses. This practice is increasingly common in sectors such as healthcare, aviation, oil and gas, finance, and technology. For example, a tech company pays for expensive international certifications and inserts a repayment clause if the employee resigns within two years.

2. Non-Compete Clauses

A non-compete clause seeks to prevent an employee from working for a competitor or engaging in a similar business after leaving employment. Some Nigerian employment contracts now contain clauses stating that an employee cannot work for competing organizations, operate within a specific industry, or render similar services within Nigeria or outside the country for a period of time. These clauses are often inserted to protect confidential information, trade secrets, and business goodwill. However, the legality of these restrictions depends heavily on one principle: “reasonableness.”

THE NIGERIAN LEGAL POSITION: FREEDOM OF LABOUR VS EMPLOYER PROTECTION

Under Nigerian law, employment relationships are fundamentally contractual. Parties are generally free to agree on terms, and courts will usually respect voluntarily executed agreements. However, Nigerian courts also recognize an equally important principle that no contract should unjustly restrain a person’s right to earn a living. This principle comes from the doctrine of Restraint of Trade under common law. A restraint of trade clause is any contractual provision that limits a person’s ability to work, practice a profession, or conduct business. The general legal rule is that a restraint of trade clause is presumed void unless it is shown to be reasonable between the parties and not contrary to public policy.

What Makes a Non-Compete Clause Enforceable?

For a restraint clause to be enforceable in Nigeria, the employer must prove that the restriction is reasonable in duration, necessary to protect legitimate business interests, and not oppressive to the employee. Be rest assured that Courts do not enforce clauses merely because they appear in a signed contract.

Nigerian Courts and the Test of Reasonableness

The Nigerian Courts have repeatedly held that restraint clauses must not be excessive or unconscionable. In determining reasonableness, courts examine the nature of the employee’s role, the employee’s access to confidential information, bargaining power between employer and employee, and whether the clause effectively destroys the employee’s livelihood among others. For instance, a clause preventing a former employee from working anywhere in Nigeria for two years may likely be considered excessive and unenforceable. Similarly, an employer cannot merely use a non-compete clause as a weapon to punish an employee for resigning or relocating abroad.

CAN AN EMPLOYER FORCE YOU TO STAY?

The simple answer is “No”. Under Nigerian law, Courts generally do not enforce forced labour or involuntary servitude through employment contracts. An employer cannot legally compel an employee to continue working against their will. This aligns with constitutional principles protecting dignity and freedom of labour. At most, the employer may pursue damages for breach of contract where legitimate losses can be proven.

The Real Battlefield: Repayment of Training Costs

This is where many disputes arise. Most Employers will argue that they have invested heavily in your development; and you cannot immediately leave after benefiting from company-sponsored training. Employees will respond that the company benefited from their labour while they worked there, and that they also have a constitutional right to seek better opportunities. This is where the Nigerian courts tend to strike a balance. A training bond is more likely to be upheld where:

• The employer genuinely incurred identifiable training expenses,
• The amount claimed is reasonable and not punitive,
• The employee voluntarily signed the agreement,
• The duration of the bond is not excessive,
• And the employer can prove actual financial loss.

Public Policy and the “Japa” Economy

The current economic climate in Nigeria has added a new dimension to employment disputes. Rising inflation, currency instability, insecurity, and declining purchasing power have intensified migration pressures. Many professionals now view relocation not as luxury, but as economic survival. Consequently, courts may increasingly scrutinize restrictive employment clauses through the lens of public policy and fairness.

IMPORTANT CLAUSES EMPLOYEES SHOULD CHECK BEFORE SIGNING

Before signing any employment contract, employees should carefully review:

1. Training Bond Clauses: Employees should always check the exact amount involved, the duration,Repayment conditions, and whether the figures reflect actual training costs.

2. Non-Compete Clauses: Employees should always check thegeographic restrictions, time limits before picking new jobs, scope of prohibited activities, and whether the clause is realistically enforceable.

3. Liquidated Damages Clauses: Some employers insert fixed penalty sums disguised as compensation. Courts may refuse to enforce penalties that are excessive or punitive.

4. Exit Procedures: Employees should resign properly and avoid abrupt departures that could strengthen an employer’s legal claim.

EMPLOYERS IMPORTANT CHECKLIST

Nigerian law provides protection for employers. Companies have the right to protect confidential information, client relationships, trade secrets, and justifiable investments in staff training. Restrictive provisions must be properly crafted, nevertheless, to prevent them from becoming illegal trade restrictions. A well-written provision safeguards corporate objectives without limiting an employee’s ability to advance in their career.

CONCLUSION

The “Japa” wave has transformed employment law discussions in Nigeria from abstract legal theory into everyday reality. What once appeared to be technical contractual clauses now directly affect the lives, careers, and migration decisions of millions of Nigerian professionals. The law attempts to maintain a delicate balance that employers should not suffer unfair losses after investing in employees. However, employees should not be trapped in oppressive contractual arrangements simply because they desire a better future. Ultimately, Nigerian courts are likely to uphold only those employment restrictions that are fair, reasonable, and necessary, not those driven by economic fear or attempts to hold worker’s hostage. In the era of “Japa,” understanding your employment contract is no longer optional. It is a survival skill.

Please, like, comment and reshare if you found this helpful. Thank You.

INTRODUCTION

Someone, jokingly, during a conversation mentioned to me that the word “HOSPITAL” is an acronym for “Home for Sick Persons Including Treatment and Labour”. Although not the real meaning of the word, the historical meaning of “hospital” is quite different from its modern-day usage.

“Hospital” is derived from the Old French term “ospital,” which is derived from the Late Latin word “hospitale,” which means “guest-house, inn, or shelter.” The Latin adjective hospitalis (“hospitable”) and the word hospes (“guest,” “stranger,” or “host”) are the sources of this. What were referred to as “hospitals” throughout the Middle Ages were not primarily used for medical care. More akin to nonprofit organizations, they offered care and shelter to a wide range of individuals. It took some time for the definition of a hospital to change to its current connotation as a facility for diagnosing and treating patients. The phrase started to be applied especially to hospitals for the ill and injured during the 15th and 16th centuries. In the 18th and 19th centuries, hospitals transformed from charitable almshouses into centers of medical and scientific excellence.

Medical negligence, a critical aspect of healthcare law, is a growing concern in Nigeria. It refers to the failure of a medical professional to exercise a reasonable degree of skill and care in the treatment of a patient, resulting in injury, worsening of an existing condition, or even death. This article delves into the intricacies of medical negligence in Nigeria, exploring its legal framework, the essential elements required for a successful claim, and highlighting relevant judicial pronouncements.

THE CORE ELEMENTS IN MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE:

In Nigeria, the prosecution of medical negligence falls under both Civil Law (action for damages) and Criminal Law (where the negligence is gross), and Professional Disciplinary proceedings (Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria – MDCN). To establish a claim for medical negligence in Nigeria, a claimant or their representative must prove three fundamental elements, akin to general tortious negligence. In the case of Ezeani v. Anyanwu (1993) 3 NWLR (Pt. 284) 437 the court stated that the essential elements of negligence include ─ duty of care, breach, causation and damages. These elements are further elaborated below.

A. DUTY OF CARE: The first requirement is to show that the doctor had a duty of care to the patient. This commitment, which implies that the healthcare provider is dedicated to treating the patient, naturally arises once a doctor-patient connection is established. As in the case of Dr. A.N. Okoro v. Uzoka & Anor. (2000) 15 NWLR (Pt. 690) 314 (LPELR-3540) as failure to exercise reasonable care and skill in treatment would amount to negligence. Medical healthcare providers are ethically bond to behave in the best interests of their patients. In the case of Ogunleye v. University College Hospital (2015) LPELR- 24645(CA), being a landmark case involving a patient who alleged that the hospital’s negligence during childbirth led to the death of her child. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, highlighting the hospital’s failure to provide adequate duty of care and supervision during labor.

B. BREACH OF DUTY: Proving this is the most important and frequently difficult component. The burden of proof is to demonstrate that the healthcare provider failed to provide the level of care that would have been expected of a reasonably competent practitioner in the same field and under the same conditions. Rather than perfection, the requirement is that of a “prudent and reasonable medical professional.”The court will consider what a body of skilled professionals in that particular area would deem acceptable as seen in the case of Olatunji v. Nigerian Army Medical Corps (2009) 6 NWLR (Pt. 1137), as a soldier sued the Nigerian Army Medical Corps for negligence after undergoing surgery that resulted in severe complications. The court found that the medical team failed to adhere to standard surgical procedures, leading to the soldier’s suffering. Examples of breaches include:

• Misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis. See the case of Dr. A.N. Okoro v. Uzoka & Anor. (2000) 15 NWLR (Pt. 690) 314 (LPELR-3540)
• Incorrect treatment or administration of wrong drugs.
• Surgical errors (leaving foreign objects in the body, operating on the wrong limb).
• Failure to obtain informed consent from the patient.
• Failure to properly monitor a patient’s condition.
• Failure to refer a patient when necessary.

C. CAUSATION: The claimant must establish a direct causal link between the breach of duty by the medical professional and the injury or damage suffered by the patient. In other words, the harm would not have occurred “but for” the doctor’s negligence. The injury must not be too remote a consequence of the negligent act. In the case of UBA Plc v. Ayodele (2007) 12 NWLR (Pt. 1049) 500, the Supreme Court’s pronouncements on the standard of proof in civil cases (balance of probabilities) are relevant to medical negligence cases, where the claimant bears the burden of proof. Therefore, the claimant must proof the damages caused, see the case of Excel-C Medical Centre Ltd & Anor v. Nneoyi & Anor (2018) LPELR-44670(CA) and Delta State Hospitals Management Board & Ors. v. Onome (2018) LPELR-46522(CA).

D. DAMAGE/INJURY: Finally, the claimant must prove that they suffered actual damage, injury, or loss as a direct result of the medical negligence. This can include physical injury, psychological distress, financial losses (medical bills, loss of income), and pain and suffering. See the case of Oke v. St. Luke’s Hospital, Anua (1974) All N.L.R. 295 and Osita Nwafor v. U.T.H.B. (University Teaching Hospital Board) (1995) 6 NWLR (Pt. 401) 321. Also the burden of proof lies solely on the complainant to proof negligence by a medical practitioner to establish damages as seen in the case of UBA Plc v. Ayodele (2007) 12 NWLR (Pt. 1049) 500.

LEGAL FRAMEWORK GOVERNING MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE IN NIGERIA

Several legal instruments and principles underpin medical negligence claims in Nigeria:

• The Nigerian Constitution 1999: While not directly defining medical negligence, it provides for fundamental human rights, including the right to life and dignity of the human person (Sections 33 and 34). A breach of duty of care leading to severe harm can be argued as an infringement of these rights.
• The Law of Tort (Common Law Principles): Medical negligence primarily falls under the tort of negligence. Nigerian courts frequently rely on common law principles established in landmark English cases like Donoghue v. Stevenson (though not a medical case, it established the general principle of duty of care) and Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee, which laid down the “Bolam test” for professional negligence (though its application has seen modifications in various jurisdictions, including Nigeria, to ensure it doesn’t become a “doctor knows best” defense without scrutiny).
• Medical and Dental Practitioners Act (CAP M8 LFN 2004): This Act establishes the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria (MDCN), which regulates the medical profession. It outlines standards of professional conduct and provides for disciplinary actions against practitioners found guilty of infamous conduct in a professional respect, which can include acts of negligence.
• National Health Act 2014: This Act aims to regulate health services in Nigeria and establish standards. While it doesn’t explicitly detail medical negligence, it emphasizes patient rights, including the right to information and emergency care, the breach of which can be foundational to a negligence claim.
• Evidence Act 2011: This Act governs the admissibility and weight of evidence in court, playing a crucial role in proving medical negligence claims, which often rely on expert testimony.
• Code of Medical Ethics in Nigeria (2008): Issued by the MDCN, this code sets out ethical standards and rules of professional conduct for medical and dental practitioners. Violations of this code can be indicative of a breach of the standard of care.

In the case of Omomofe v. Lagos University Teaching Hospital (LUTH) & Anor. (2012) LPELR-9346 (CA), the Court dealt with the issue of professional negligence in a hospital setting. It underscored the responsibility of hospitals for the actions of their staff and the need for proper facilities and management.

RECENT TRENDS AND CHALLENGES:

The English case of Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee (1957) 1 WLR 582 (English Case, Persuasive Authority). Although convincing, Nigerian courts have frequently applied this approach cautiously to prevent giving physicians total immunity, highlighting the need for the practice to be responsible and reasonable. The “Bolam Test,” which was created by this frequently cited case, states that if a doctor has acted in a way that is deemed appropriate by a responsible body of medical professionals who are competent in that particular art, they are not guilty of negligence. While not Nigerian, has influenced the interpretation of the Bolam test in Nigeria. It states that the court is not bound by a body of professional opinion if it is not “reasonable” or “responsible.” This means courts can scrutinize medical practices more closely. While not explicitly adopted in a leading Nigerian Supreme Court case, it represents a more patient-centric approach that Nigerian courts might increasingly consider. In the case of Iya v. W.A.E.C (1995) 4 NWLR (Pt. 389) 293, the court emphasizes the standard of care as that of a “reasonable man” in the circumstances. In a medical context, this translates to the standard of a reasonable and competent medical professional. Some recent innovations include the following

1.ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR): There is a growing recognition of ADR mechanisms, such as mediation and conciliation, as a means to resolve medical negligence disputes outside of traditional litigation, offering potentially faster and less adversarial solutions.

2. INFORMED CONSENT: The emphasis on informed consent has grown. Patients have the right to know about the risks, benefits, and alternative treatments before consenting to a procedure. Failure to adequately inform a patient can lead to a successful negligence claim, even if the treatment itself was expertly performed.In the case of Ifeanyi v. Medical and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal (2010) LPELR- 4690(CA), thesurgeon was held guilty of negligence for failing to obtain informed consent and for not providing adequate post-operative care.

3. EVIDENTIARY CHALLENGES: Proving medical negligence remains challenging in Nigeria due to a lack of readily available expert witnesses, the complexity of medical procedures, and a general reluctance within the medical community to testify against colleagues. The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur (the fact speaks for itself) can sometimes assist, where the negligence is so obvious that it needs no further proof (e.g., leaving a swab in a patient’s body after surgery).

LAPSES IN THE PROSECUTION OF MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE

While the legal framework exists, the successful prosecution of medical negligence cases in Nigeria is fraught with challenges, often leading to a perceived lack of accountability:

• The Burden of Proof: The burden rests squarely on the claimant to prove the negligence. This is difficult because the claimant is usually a layperson challenging a specialized profession.
• Need for Expert Testimony: Proving that the standard of care was breached almost always requires an expert witness—another medical practitioner—to testify against a colleague. Securing such testimony is a significant practical hurdle.
• Data and Access to Records: Hospitals and doctors often possess the critical medical records, and securing these vital pieces of evidence can be challenging for the claimant.
• Complexity and Duration: Medical negligence cases are typically lengthy and expensive, spanning many years through the judicial process, which can discourage victims.
• Exception: Res Ipsa Loquitur (The thing speaks for itself). In rare cases, where the negligence is so self-evident that it could not have occurred without carelessness (e.g., operating on the wrong limb or leaving a foreign object in the body), the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur may apply. This shifts the evidential burden to the defendant (the professional) to prove they were not negligent.

REMEDIES

Successful claimants may obtain general damages (pain, suffering, loss of amenities), special damages (quantified losses like further treatment and lost earnings), and occasionally aggravated/exemplary damages for especially egregious conduct. Parallel professional discipline (MDPDT) or, in extreme cases, criminal negligence may arise (Criminal Code discussions often cite duties relevant to dangerous acts and gross negligence).

CONCLUSION

Medical negligence in Nigeria is a complex area of law, balancing the need to protect patients from harm with the reality of medical practice. While the legal framework is largely based on established common law principles and specific statutes, challenges in proving these cases persist. The continuous evolution of judicial interpretation, particularly concerning the standard of care and informed consent, alongside the efforts of regulatory bodies like the MDCN, are crucial in ensuring accountability and upholding patient rights within the Nigerian healthcare system. As awareness grows and legal precedents accumulate, it is hoped that medical personnels will observe the highest level of duty of care for patients to advoid breach of such duty which will result to medical negligence, and that victims of medical negligence get justice when such rights are breached.

The power of pardon, often termed the prerogative of mercy, is a venerable principle of law inherited by Nigeria from its colonial past. It represents the Executive arm of government’s final act of clemency, designed to temper justice with mercy. In Nigeria, this power is vested in the President at the Federal level and the Governor at the State level, but its exercise remains a subject of perpetual debate, especially regarding issues of transparency, political influence, and the fight against corruption. Recently, President Ahmed Bola Tinubu exercised the power of prerogative of mercy, which has brought a lot of questions as to some of the persons who were pardoned by the president due to the offences they have committed. Questions have been buckled up in the mind of Nigerians as to why such pardons were awarded to some of the convicts. This article will help to answer some basic questions as to the powers the President and Governors or each state have in regard to the prerogative of mercy as enshrined in the 1999 constitution of Nigeria.

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITIES AND RELEVANT LAWS

The power of clemency is explicitly enshrined in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria:

Presidential Pardon: Section 175 of the Constitution empowers the President to:

1. Grant any person concerned with or convicted of any offence created by an Act of the National Assembly a pardon, either free or subject to lawful conditions.
2. Grant a respite, substitute a less severe punishment, or remit the whole or any part of any punishment.

The President exercises this power after consultation with the Council of State.

Gubernatorial Pardon: Section 212 of the Constitution grants similar powers to the Governor of a State in respect of any offence created by a Law of that State.

The Governor exercises this power after consultation with the State Advisory Council on Prerogative of Mercy, as may be established by a law of the State.

THE KEY INSTRUMENTS OF THE PREROGATIVE OF MERCY INCLUDE:

1. Pardon: Completely absolves the person of guilt/sentence and restores their rights and privileges.
2. Reprieve/Respite: Postpones the execution of a sentence, often the death penalty of a convict.
3. Commutation: Changes a punishment to a less severe one, like death sentence to life imprisonment.
4. Remission: Reduces the quantum of the punishment, like a 20-year term reduced to 10 years.

JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION AND KEY CASES

The courts have played a vital role in defining the scope and limitations of this executive power:

In the case of Olu Falae v. Olusegun Obasanjo (1999) LPELR-6585 (CA): The Court of Appeal defined a pardon as “an act of grace by the appropriate authority, which mitigates or obliterates the punishment the law demands for the offence and restores the rights and privileges forfeited on account of the offence.” This affirmed the inherent nature of the power as an act of Executive clemency.

In the case of Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Achida & Anor. (2018) LPELR-46065 (CA): This case is vital because the Court of Appeal determined that the constitutional power of pardon can solely be used for individuals who have been tried and found guilty by an authorized court. This choice seems to restrict the Executive’s authority to issue “pre-conviction” pardons, reinforcing the principle of constitutional innocence until proven guilty. The court primarily restricted the employment of the term “concerned with” in the Constitutional clauses to instances that have progressed beyond the pre-conviction phase.

In Solola & Anor. v. The State (2005) NWLR (Pt. 921) 270: The Supreme Court emphasized that, even though it is not solely on pardon, a person condemned of a capital offense is considered to have filed a second appeal with the Supreme Court if his appeal to the Court of Appeal is denied. The Governor or Head of State cannot use the pardoning power until that last appeal is decided. This highlights the fact that mercy in such serious cases typically requires the use of all available legal procedures.

1. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s Clemency (2025): The President recently granted clemency and pardon to numerous inmates and former convicts based on recommendations from the Presidential Advisory Committee on Prerogative of Mercy. Notable recipients included:
2. Posthumous Pardons: Granted to figures like Herbert Macaulay and Major General Mamman Vatsa (sentenced to death in 1986 over an alleged coup plot).
3. Pardon for Convicts: Notable pardons were granted to former political figures, including former House of Representatives member, Farouk Lawan, for corruption charges.
4. Maryam Sanda’s Pardon and Kelvin Prosper Oniarah (Kelvin Ibruvwe): President Bola Tinubu has granted clemency to Maryam Sanda (2025), who was sentenced to death in 2020 for killing her husband, Bilyaminu Bello, during a domestic dispute. Currently sparking a lot of controversies online
5. Ogoni Nine: Posthumous pardons were also granted to the Ogoni Nine, including Ken Saro Wiwa.
6. The exercise also saw the commutation of death sentences to life imprisonment and the reduction of prison terms for scores of other inmates, often citing good conduct, vocational skills acquisition, and ill-health.
7. State Governors’ Pardons (Ongoing): Governors across various states periodically grant pardons, often to decongest correctional facilities. These are typically for inmates with minor offences, terminal illnesses, or those who have shown remarkable rehabilitation.

CHALLENGES IN THE EXERCISE OF PARDON

Lack of Transparency and Uniformity: While the Constitution requires consultation, the process often lacks transparency. There are no consistent, nationwide statutory guidelines for the selection of beneficiaries, leading to fears of arbitrary application.

Abuse for Political Patronage: This is the most significant challenge. The power is often perceived as a tool to reward political allies or absolve politically exposed persons (PEPs) convicted of graft, thereby undermining the efforts of anti-corruption agencies and the judiciary.

Undermining the Fight Against Corruption: Granting pardon to high-profile corruption convicts shortly after their conviction can send a message that the Executive is not fully committed to the rule of law and the anti-corruption fight, potentially eroding public trust.

Absence of Judicial Review: Given that pardon is an Executive “act of grace,” Nigerian law has historically excluded it from judicial review, raising concerns about a check on potential abuse of power.

Marginalisation of Petty Offenders: Critics argue that the process often focuses heavily on high-profile cases, neglecting the plight of indigent and low-level offenders who constitute the majority of the inmate population.

THE WAY FORWARD

Constitutional Amendment: Sections 175 and 212 should be amended to establish clearer standards or a non-exhaustive list of justifiable grounds for granting clemency (e.g., exceptional rehabilitation, terminal illness, demonstrable miscarriage of justice). This would provide a check on unfettered discretion.

Statutory Guidelines and Transparency: The National Assembly and State Houses of Assembly should enact legislation providing mandatory, uniform, and public guidelines for the Advisory Councils on Prerogative of Mercy, ensuring a merit-based, rigorous application process.

Strengthening the Advisory Councils: The Councils should be fully independent, multi-disciplinary, and insulated from political pressure, comprising experts in penology, psychology, law, and social work. Their recommendations and the rationale for the final decision should be publicly documented.

Exclusion for Certain Offences: There is a strong argument for a constitutional amendment to specifically exclude or require a super-majority vote of the Council of State for pardons granted to persons convicted of egregious offences like terrorism, genocide, and certain high-level corruption cases.

Focus on Decongesting Prisons: The power should be used more deliberately to address prison congestion by prioritising the commutation and remission of sentences for low-risk, rehabilitated inmates, thereby serving the goal of penal reform and restorative justice.

In conclusion, the prerogative of mercy is a necessary safeguard against the rigidity of the law and a vital instrument for social reintegration. However, its continued relevance and legitimacy in a democratic Nigeria hinge on its judicious, transparent, and non-discriminatory exercise, ensuring it remains an act of mercy and not a tool of political expediency.

INTRODUCTION
“Do you want me to die”?, that was the first question that came out from his mouth when I told him to draft a will. It was quite obvious from the conversation I had with this person, a lot of people do not want to hear the word “will”, as it sounds like a death sentence.
However, it is very important to note that one of the most important aspects of future planning is determining what will happen to one’s assets after they have passed away.

This article offers a thorough analysis of wills in Nigeria, including their significance, prerequisites, and preparation procedure.

WHAT IS A WILL?
A will, also known legally as a “testament”,  is a legal declaration and confirmation of one’s  intentions regarding the distribution of one’s estate/properties after one’s death, see the case of Okeke V Okeke [2000] 3 NWLR (Pt. 649) 506. It specifies who inherits your assets, who will manage your estate (executor), and can even include instructions for guardianship of minor children who are beneficiaries to the will.

WHY IS A WILL IMPORTANT?
Having a will offers several benefits:
a) It brings about control: Through a will, a person can decide who inherits your assets, ensuring one’s loved ones are provided for according to their wishes. Dawodu v. Isikalu & Ors. (2011) LPELR (CA).
b) It avoids intestacy: Dying without a will (intestate) means one’s investment is distributed according to pre-set legal rules, which may not align with ones preferences, and most times gets to be a big challenge allocating one’s properties.
c) It reduces family disputes: A clear will can prevent conflicts among family members regarding inheritance. Although some family members or relatives can cause a scene in regards to the validity of the will and allocations of such properties.
d) Protect of  loved ones: A will can ensure the well-being of one’s spouse, children, and other dependents.
e) It brings about efficiency: A well-drafted will can streamline the probate process, saving time and costs for the beneficiaries.

REQUIREMENTS FOR A VALID WILL IN NIGERIA
For a will to be legally valid in Nigeria, it must meet certain requirements as outlined below, also see the case of Jonah & Anor v. Akpadiaha & Ors (2021) LPELR-55102(CA).
i. Testamentary Capacity: The person making the will (testator) must be of sound mind and have the mental capacity to understand the implications of their decisions. See Mabogunje V Adewunmi (2006) 11 NWLR Pt 991.
ii. Age of testator : The testator must generally be at least 18 years old, although exceptions may exist for minors in certain situations, such as military personnel on active duty who are below the statutory age.
iii. Will must be in writing: The will must be in writing, although it doesn’t need to follow a specific format.
iv. Will must be signed by testator: The testator must sign the will, or someone else may sign on their behalf in their presence and under their direction. The court, however, can make exceptions to signature under special circumstances, see  Dan & Anor (2018) LPELR 44415 (CA)
v. Attestation by witnesses : The signature must be witnessed by two or more competent individuals who also sign the will in the presence of the testator.
vi. Will must be free from Undue Influence: The will must be made voluntarily, without any coercion or pressure from others.

TYPES OF WILL IN NIGERIA
While there are different types of wills, the most common in Nigeria is the formal will, which adheres to the requirements outlined above. Other types include:
a) Simple Will: The disposal of one’ possessions after one’s death is outlined in a simple will, sometimes referred to as a “testamentary will.” People with very simple estates and simple family situations can benefit from this kind of will. An executor, beneficiaries, and the distribution of one’s assets can all be specified in a basic will.
b) Conditional Will: A conditional will specifies the requirements that must be met before asset distribution can take place. For example, you could stipulate that a beneficiary will only get their inheritance if they reach a certain age or achieve a specific milestone. These conditions allow you to regulate the time and circumstances of asset distribution.
c) Joint Will: A joint will is written by two people, usually couples, who want to merge their estates and make united decisions on asset distribution. Joint wills can make the procedure easier for couples who have similar goals because they assure that the surviving partner inherits the full estate if the first person dies.
d) Mutual Will: A mutual will is similar to a joint will in that it involves two or more people, but each participant drafts their own will. People who want to make sure that their estates are handled and distributed in a coordinated way, in accordance with predetermined terms, frequently utilise these wills.
e) Testamentary Trust Will:  Testamentary trust will allows you to include trusts in one’s will, allowing you to set aside assets for certain uses or beneficiaries. This sort of will is very appropriate if you have minor children or beneficiaries who may require long-term financial support. Trusts can also provide tax benefits and protect assets from creditors, ensuring that one’s estate is properly handled even after you die.
f) Holographic Will: The testator here signs and handwrites a holographic will without the requirement for witnesses. Nigerian law recognises holographic wills, but because they are informal, they may be more closely examined and face difficulties.
g) Customary Wills: These wills are recognized under customary law in certain communities and may have different requirements. See Ayinike V. Ibiduni (1959)4 FSC 280
h) Islamic Wills: These wills comply with Islamic law principles regarding inheritance.

HOW TO CREATE A WILL IN NIGERIA
Creating a will involves several steps:
i. Consider Your Assets: Make a list of your assets as it will help you decide how to share it.
ii. Choose an Executor: Select a trusted person to manage your estate and ensure your wishes are carried out accordingly as stipulated in the will.
iii. Clearly Identify Beneficiaries in the will: It is very important to state out clearly the persons to inherit one’s properties with concise details about them.
iv. Guardianship: This is mostly applicable when the testator has minors as beneficiaries. It will be important to designate a trusted guardian for them in the will before they come of age.
v. Seek Legal Advice: Consult with a lawyer specializing in estate planning to guide you through the process and ensure your will is legally sound.
vi. Draft the Will: Your lawyer will help you draft the will, ensuring it complies with all legal requirements.
vii. Sign and also get Witnesses to Attest the Will: Sign the will in the presence of your witnesses, who will also sign the document. See Ize-ayanmu V Alonge (2007) 6 NWLR Pt 1028. It is very important to get trustworthy witnesses to also sign the will.
viii. Store the Will Safely: Keep the original will in a secure location, such as a safe deposit box or with your lawyer.

CAN WOMEN INHERIT PROPERTIES VIA WILL IN NIGERIA?
Some traditions in Nigeria have, over the years, discriminated against women having the rights to own properties or be transferred possession of any property in a will. However, this has been put to rest in Nigeria as women can now acquire properties and inherit estate and possession from wills. See the cases of Mojekwu V Mojekwu [1997] LPELR-13777(CA), Uke V Iro (2001),11 NWLR (PT. 723)196, Ukeje V Ukeje (2014) LPELR-22724(SC).

AMENDING OR REVOKING A WILL
You can amend or revoke your will at any time during your lifetime. To make changes, you can create a “codicil”, which is a supplementary document that modifies or adds to the existing will see Osemwingie & Ors LPELR-19790(CA).
To revoke a will, you can destroy it, write a new will, or make a clear statement of revocation.

PROBATE
After the testator’s death, the will must go through probate, a legal process that validates the will and confirms the executor’s authority to administer the estate to the beneficiaries of the will as directed by the testator in the will.

CONCLUSION
Making a will is an essential step in planning for your future and ensuring your loved ones are provided for. By understanding the requirements and process involved, you can create a legally sound document that reflects your wishes and protects your legacy. It is highly recommended to seek professional legal advice when creating or amending a will to ensure its validity and effectiveness.
GET A WILL DRAFTED TODAY, CONSULT A LAWYER FOR FURTHER ADVICE!!

INTRODUCTION
The right to bail is a constitutionally recognised right. However, the term “Bail is free”, as enshrined in the constitution seems to be difficult to guarantee, especially when it comes to its enforcement in the hands of the authorities in charge.
In some cases, even after the person accused or detained is exonerated from such accusations and deem innocent, the authorities in charge may still require some “tips” or term it “bail requirements”, before the realease of such an individual.
In criminal law, bail is the temporary release of an arrested individual from detention under specific terms. It is a cornerstone of justice that seeks to avoid needless detention of those who are believed innocent until proven guilty, as the main function of bail is to ensure the presence of the accused during trial.  The right to bail in Nigeria is protected by the Constitution and further clarified by the 2015 Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA)

STATUTORY FRAMEWORK FOR BAIL IN NIGERIA
The right to bail in Nigeria finds its roots in Section 35(4) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended)(CFRN), which states:
“Every person who is arrested or detained shall be brought before a court within a reasonable time and shall be entitled to bail, except where charged with a serious criminal offence.”
In addition to recognising the value of individual liberty, this constitutional clause aims to avoid unwarranted protracted incarceration.
The ACJA 2015 further reinforces the right to bail through various provisions, notably Section 158, which states:
“An accused person shall be entitled to bail except in the following circumstances:
a) where there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused person, if released, would commit additional offences;
b) where there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused person would attempt to pervert the course of justice;
c) where there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused person would not stand trial;
d) where the charge against the accused person is for an offence punishable with death.”
These provisions outline the general principle that bail should be granted liberally, while acknowledging certain exceptions where the interests of justice may necessitate detention.

TYPES OF BAIL IN NIGERIA
Generally, an accused person is not meant to be denied bail unless on charges of capital offences, which have its exception. See BOLAKALE v. STATE (2006) 1 NWLR (Pt.962) at 511.
There are basically two types of bail that can be secured in Nigeria, police bail and court bail.
A.Police bail: Also known as administrative bail, is given by the police at the beginning of an investigation, prior to the suspect being formally charged in court. It is frequently given for offences that are not serious or when the authorities do not have enough proof to hold the offender. In general, police bail is less formal and may include requirements like the suspect or accused going to the police station on a regular basis pending investigation of the case.
B.Court Bail: This kind of bail is given by a judge or court, which must be exercised judiciously(see DOKUBO-ASARI V. FRN (2007) LPELR – 958 (SC). Court bail is sub-divided into two types:
I. Bail pending trial: This is given to the accused while they are waiting for their trial. Conditions for the release are specified by the court and may include reporting requirements, travel limitations, financial surety, and surety bonds. See JACK V. C.O.P (2011) LPELR 3855.
II. Bail Pending Appeal: This is granted to a convicted person who has appealed their conviction at the trial court. The court may grant bail while the appeal is being heard, allowing the person to remain free until the appeal is decided. See the case of UCHENNA v. IGP (2023) LPELR-61058 (CA)

BASIC CONDITION CONSIDERATIONS
The grant of bail is not an automatic right. Courts must consider various factors to ensure that the interests of justice are served. These factors  include the following:
a.The nature and seriousness of the offence: Stronger and stringent bail requirements or even the refusal of release may be necessary for more serious offences, such as capital offences. See MAMMAN V. STATE (2012) ALL FWLR (Pt.621) 1542 at 1547
b.The prosecution’s strength of case: In the event that the prosecution makes a compelling case, the court might be more likely to refuse bail in order to keep the accused from escaping.
c.The accused’s background and personality: The court may take into account the accused’s community connections and any criminal history they may have.  Some accused could even get killed outside by the  community or otherwise. Bail could be denied to protect the life of the accused if the tension is high outside based on the circumstances of the offence committed.
d. Accused interference with witnesses or evidence: There are plethora of occasions where the accused, after being granted bail, goes out to either terminate the life of vital witnesses or even tamper with evidence that could be used against them. See OMODARA v. STATE (2004) 1 NWLR (Pt.853) 83.
e.The likelihood that the defendant will escape the jurisdiction: So, in order to evaluate the accused’s financial situation and travel history, the court may assess the risk of flight or accused likelihood to abscond jurisdiction of trial.

COURTS ROLE ON BAIL
The court must act prudently and impartially, balancing the accused constiutional rights with the need to uphold public order and guarantee the proper administration of justice. The enactment of the ACJA 2015 has had a significant impact on Nigerian bail jurisprudence, providing a comprehensive legal framework for the grant and denial of bail. The court is crucial in deciding whether to grant bail and, if so, under what conditions. The conditions attached to grant of bail must not be suffocating, unbearable, unworkable, and unduly burdensome. See ABACHA v. STATE (2002) 5 NWLR (Pt. 761) 638.

BAIL IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGES
Despite the legal framework in place, the implementation of bail in Nigeria faces several challenges:
a. Judicial Discretion: The broad discretion afforded to judges in bail matters can sometimes lead to inconsistencies and disparities in decisions.
b. Corruption: Corruption within the judiciary and law enforcement agencies can undermine the integrity of the bail process.
c. Lack of Awareness: Many individuals are unaware of their rights to bail and the procedures for obtaining it.
d.Overcrowding in prisons: Overcrowding in Nigerian prisons could enhance the problem of prolonged detention, as many individuals who should be granted bail remain incarcerated due to lack of space.

CONCLUSION
A vital component of guaranteeing the just administration of justice in Nigeria is bail, a fundamental right. The Constitution and the ACJA 2015 provide precise principles for bail, establishing a well-established legal framework. But, issues like court discretion, corruption, and ignorance still make it difficult to apply bail effectively in real-world situations. It is imperative to advance judicial education and training, improve accountability and openness in the legal system, and increase public knowledge of the right to bail in order to address these issues.

INTRODUCTION
Former Nigerian President Dr. Goodluck Ebele Jonathan signed the Same-Sex Marriage (Prohibition) Bill (SSMPA) into law on January 7, 2014. Cohabitation between same-sex sexual partners is prohibited by law, as is any “public display of same-sex amorous relationship.” The SSMPA punishes anybody who “registers, operates or participates in gay clubs, societies and organisation” or “supports” the operations of such groups with a 10-year prison sentence. The severe penalties include imprisonment for 10 to 14 years. Following the SSMPA’s passage, there were numerous media reports of high levels of violence, including extortion and mob attacks against LGBT individuals. However, do the LGBTQ+ community have rights in Nigeria?.

ENFORECEMENT OF THE NIGERIAN LAW
In Nigeria, same-sex relationships and marriage are illegal under the Same-Sex Marriage (Prohibition) Act of 2013. A 14-year prison term is associated with it. International human rights organisations have universally denounced this bill, claiming it infringes upon fundamental rights to freedom of association and privacy. LGBTQ+ rights are becoming more and more popular in Nigeria, especially among younger people. Strong opposition, meanwhile, is also present and stems from cultural and religious convictions. For many Nigerians, homosexuality is an import from the West that goes against their cultural beliefs.
The law has been enforced in recent years, as seen by the numerous arrests of LGBTQ+ persons, either one-on-one or in large groups, frequently coupled with police brutality and violence. LGBT individuals have been the target of several reports of violence and discrimination in recent years, including extortion, harassment, assault, mob attacks, and denial of basic rights and services. Section 214 of the Federal Criminal Code in all Southern states punishes homosexuality by 14 years in prison for both men and women. “Anyone who – (a) has carnal knowledge of any person against the order of nature; or (c) permits a male person to have carnal knowledge of him or her against the order of nature is guilty of a felony, and is liable to imprisonment for fourteen years.”
Laws and penalties pertaining to homosexuality varied in Northern Nigeria. All Northern Nigerian states are subject to Section 284 of the Penal Code (Northern States) Federal Provisions Act, which declares that “Anyone who engages in carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman, or animal shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to fourteen years and shall also be liable to fine.” Because of the application of Shari’a law, same-sex couples may be punished with the death penalty in certain Northern Nigerian states. All Muslims who willingly submit to the Shari’a courts’ jurisdiction are subject to the Shari’a criminal laws.
For LGBTQ+ people in Nigeria, the social and legal environment is very difficult. Some proponents contend that current laws on discrimination and freedom of association may provide some protection for LGBTQ+ rights, even though there is no particular legislation that addresses these issues. However, these laws are frequently applied inconsistently. The Nigerian government has been under pressure from throughout the world to defend LGBTQ+ rights and decriminalise same-sex relationships. Moreso, according to the administration, the 2013 law expresses popular will and is consistent with the nation’s religious and cultural values.

LGBTQ+ RIGHTS IN NIGERIA
So many Nigerians are of the opinion that the LGBTQ+ community/persons, are not suppose to have rights as their actions go contrary against the law, hence the reasons for jungle justice when  ever they get to apprehend those involved in acts of same sex romance.
It is pertinent to note that the SSMPA act  and other legislation in Nigeria strictly prohibit LGBTQ+ activities. However, the law does not close it’s eyes to the fact that they are human beings.  As such, it is important to note some of the basic rights that should be enjoyed as provided for in the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria as amended (CFRN),to those involved in such activities of same-sex in Nigeria as follows:
1. Right to life(S. 33. CFRN): As they are humans,  their acts are condemned by the laws. When they are apprehended, it is to not terminate their life’s, but be handed over to the appropriate authorities to take up the case rather than jungle justice.
2. Right to dignity(S. 34 CFRN): This entails that they shouldn’t be subjected to torture, inhumane treatment, or maltreatment in the hands of the public or authorities
3. Right to fair hearing (S. 36 CFRN): This confirms that every person who is charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed to be innocent until he is proved guilty.
4. Right to peaceful assembly and association (S. 40 CFRN): The constitution provides that every person shall be entitled to assemble freely and associate with other persons, and he may form or belong to any political party, trade union or any other association for the protection of their interests. This is a right highly debated by the LGBTQ+ community, as they feel this right is being violated.
5. Right to freedom from discrimination (S. 42 CFRN): The constitution provides freedom from discrimination. However, it is obvious that the same-sex community faces constant discrimination by both the public and by authorities in charge of protecting them.
6. Right to work: In as much as there is a big disdain to the LGBTQ+ community in Nigeria, they are not to be discarded when they apply for work.
7. Right to freedom of movement(S 41 CFRN): The LGBTQ+ community also has the right to free movement in the country, but that is not the case as it stands.
8. Right to priv acy (S 37 CFRN): The LGBTQ+ community is also supposed to enjoy the right to privacy. However, there have been a lot of such breaches to that constitutional right, both by the public and the government agencies.
9. Right to health care facilities: It is no new news that they have been refused medical attention in most of the healthcare facilities due to their choice of association. This should not be the case.

CONCLUSION
It is important to note that the Nigerian laws stand firmly against the activities of the LGBTQ+ community, and as such, have place laws to counter such activities as it is against the policy of natural law, culture, morals and beliefs of the Nigerian standards. However, it is important to note that, since the LGBTQ+ belief is made up of people, they should equally be treated as one and not be subjected to inhumane treatment by the public or the government agencies.

In Nigeria, unlawful incarceration and wrongful detention are grave violations of human rights. It happens when people are denied their freedom for longer than is permitted by law or without following the proper legal procedures. In addition to violating basic human rights, this conduct compromises the integrity of the legal system and the rule of law.
Detention itself is lawful when carried out rightly by the appropriate authorities and in line with the constitutional construction. Agencies like the Nigerian Police Force can detain a person(S 4 of Police Act), EFCC, SSS, and ICPC, among others.
A court can  acquit and discharge  an accused on grounds of unlawful detention  if the court finds out that such detention is unconstitutional and unlawful as seen in the case of CHIEF IBRAHIM SALAMI v. PA JOSIAH OYEDIRAN OLAOYE & ANOR (2018) LPELR-47256(CA)

NIGERIAN LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND CHALLENGES
The Nigerian Constitution guarantees the right to personal liberty and prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention (section 35, 1999 constitution as Amended). However, despite these constitutional safeguards, wrongful detention remains a persistent problem due to several factors:
OVERCROWDING IN CORRECTIONAL CENTRE’S: Correctional facilities in Nigeria are infamously overcrowded, which results in extended incarceration for even small infractions. Because it can postpone proceedings and raise the possibility that people will be detained longer than is permitted by law, this overcrowding makes the issue of wrongful detention worse.
POLICE CORRUPTION AND BRUTALITY: The Nigerian Police Force have been charged with a number of human rights violations, such as extrajudicial executions, torture, and arbitrary arrests. These actions frequently result in unlawful incarceration and wrongful detention. A police officer can be held liable for violation of human rights on grounds of unlawful detention and malicious arrest, as seen in the case of  EYEMI v. ONAH & ORS (2021) LPELR-55842(CA)
EQUALITY UNDER THE LAW: People who are poor typically have limited access to legal counsel. As a result, people may be held without access to adequate legal representation to contest their incarceration or guarantee the protection of their rights.
JUDICIAL DELAYS: The Nigerian legal system frequently experiences delays that might result in protracted pre-trial detention. This delays justice and increases the likelihood of individuals being held for excessive periods without trial.

CONSEQUENCES OF WRONG DETENTION
Wrongful detention has far-reaching consequences for individuals and society as a whole:
PSYCHOLOGICAL TRAUMA: Individuals who are unlawfully held frequently experience severe psychological trauma, including anxiety, despair, and post-traumatic stress disorder.
LOSS OF INCOME: Wrongful incarceration can result in social shame and prejudice, making reintegration into society difficult. Detention can lead to a loss of income and livelihood, resulting in financial hardship and poverty.
LOSS OF PUBLIC TRUST: The prevalence of unlawful detention erodes public trust in the legal system and weakens the rule of law.

BASIC RIGHTS OF A DETAINED PERSON
a. Right to Life except on the execution of a court order when found guilty of an offence(S 33 CFRN as amended)
b. Right to dignity of person torture or any inhumane and degrading treatment by a police officer. (S 34 CFRN 1999 as amended,  also the case of BEEIOR ISHENGE v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, PLATEAU STATE & ANOR (2019) LPELR-48390(CA)
c. The right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty by the prosecuting counsel beyond reasonable grounds based on evidence adduced (S 36  CFRN 1999 as amended)
d. You do not have to write a statement or say anything while in detention until after consultation with a lawyer. As provided for in the ACJA, every statement taking must either be recorded by the investigating police officer when a lawyer is not present or must be taken in the presence of a lawyer.
e. Information about reasons for detention in a language you understand.
f. The police must charge you with an offence within the period of 24hrs or 48hrsexcept on cases of capital offences, else, you should be released.(S 36 CFRN 1999 as amended)and the case of JOHNSON EKPE                      VZBJ NIGERIA LIMITED                                                  &1OR   NICN/YEN/46/2017 2022
g. The right to a lawyer and having adequate time and facilities to prepare for a defence with a lawyer of choice or legal aid services and representation during trials.
h. If you are detained without bail, trial must be within a period of two months from the date of your arrest. If you are detained with bail, you must be tried within a period of three months from the date of your arrest.
i. Options for bail either at the police station or court bail.

THE WAY FORWARD
To address the issue of wrongful detention and illegal imprisonment in Nigeria, several measures can be taken:
JUDICIAL REFORMS: Improving the efficiency of the judicial system, reducing case backlogs, and ensuring timely trials.
POLICE REFORMS: Strengthening police accountability, promoting human rights training, and combating corruption within the police force.
LEGAL AID: Expanding access to legal aid for indigent individuals to ensure they have adequate representation.
PRISON DECONGESTION: Implementing measures to decongest prisons, such as alternative sentencing options and community-based corrections programs.
PUBLIC AWARENESS: Raising public awareness about the rights of detainees and the legal remedies available to them.

CONCLUSION
Wrongful detention and illegal imprisonment are serious human rights violations that have a devastating impact on individuals and society. Addressing this issue requires a multi-pronged approach that involves judicial reforms, police reforms, expanding access to legal aid, and promoting public awareness. By taking these steps, Nigeria can move towards a more just and equitable society where the rights of all individuals are protected.