In the preceding post we started with the term known as 'security vote'
and the continuous deduction of such funds from the coffers of the
state in the 'interest of security'.
This post addresses the term Public Interest
Litigation.
What
is public interest litigation?
The Random House Dictionary
defines Public interest as:
"1. the welfare or well-being of the general public; commonwealth: health programs that directly affect the public interest. 2. appeal or relevance to the general populace: a news story of public interest.”[1]
The Black’s Law Dictionary 6th edition
defines Public interest as:
“Something
in which the public, the community at large, has some pecuniary interest or
some interest by which their legal rights or liabilities are affected...”
The Advanced
Law Lexicon defines `Public Interest Litigation' as:
"The expression `PIL' means a legal action initiated in a Court of law for the enforcement of public interest or general interest in which the public or a class of the community has pecuniary interest or some interest by which their legal rights or liabilities are affected."
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) also refers to the practice of lawyers
seeking to precipitate social change through court-ordered decrees that reform
legal rules, enforce existing laws, and articulate public norms[2].
Thus,
PIL can simply be defined as litigation for the protection of public interest. The
goal of PIL is social change and justice. That is, litigation for the good of
all. It is litigation commenced with the purpose of achieving the common good; That which
is devoid of self interest or personal gain.
The history of PIL in Nigeria may
be traced to late Chief Gani Fawehinmi, who commenced several cases in court in
the interest of the public. These suits include Gani Fawehinmi vs. Akilu (1987) 4 N.W.L.R. (Pt.67) 797,
For instance in the case of Gani Fawehinmi Vs. Akilu (1987) 4 N.W.L.R. (Pt.67) 797, Fawehinmi, a Legal Practitioner, wrote the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) requesting the DPP to exercise the power vested in him to prosecute Col. Akilu and Lt. Col Togun for the murder of Mr. Dele Giwa, or in the alternative, to endorse a certificate stating the same on the basis of the information submitted to him. The Director of Public Prosecutions declined to come to a decision on grounds that until he had received the official report from the police investigation into the affair he will not decide on the request. As a result of this refusal, Fawehinmi filed an application to the High Court of Lagos State for leave to apply for an order of mandamus compelling the Director of Public Prosecutions to decide whether or not he was going to bring proceedings against Col. Akilu and Lt. Col. Togun, and in the event of deciding not to prosecute, requiring him to certify that he had seen the information put forward by Fawehinmi but had decided not to prosecute at public instance.
This case is a perfect example of instituting an action in the interest of the public.
In a 2009 case, a Cameroonian Court held in the case of FOUNDATION
FOR ENVIRONMENT (FEDEV) .v. CHINA ROAD AND BRIDGE CORPORATION[3]
as follows:
“Public
interest litigation is intended to promote and vindicate public interest which
demands that violations of constitutional or legal rights of large number of
people who are poor, ignorant or in a socially or economically backward
position should not go unnoticed or un redressed….From the forgoing, I
therefore hold that as per section 8 (2) of the law under review, the applicant
herein have a locus standi to institute this action. …This court deems it
expedient to state that public interest litigation is an efficient tool to seek
judicial redress and subsequent government action to socio-economic challenges
of the powerless segment of the society who due to their financial constraints
and ignorance are unable to access justice. The preliminary objection is
accordingly overruled”
Thus an applicant must show to the court that the
action is brought in public interest and not for pecuniary gain.
Returning to our case reference in the previous post, can we conclude that the action instituted by Chief Nkereuwem Akpan at the Federal High Court Abuja is a PIL? Yes, I think we can. What do you think?
No comments:
Post a Comment