Tag: Virtual Court

AGF Malami to launch virtual court sitting facilities

Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN is to launch nationwide deployment and use of Virtual Court Proceedings in Nigeria’s Correctional Centres.

This was announced on Friday in a statement signed by Umar Gwandu, Special Assistant on Media and Public Relations, Office of the Attorney General of the Federation.

According to the statement, Malami is to launch the pilot project for the deployment and use Virtual Court Sitting facilities at the Kuje Correctional Centre, Abuja on Monday.

“Expected at the occasion are the Honourable Minister of Interior; Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola, the Controller – General of the Nigerian Correctional Service; Halilu Nababa as well as members of the Presidential Committee on Correctional Reforms and Decongestion.

“The Secretary of the Presidential Committee on Correctional Reforms and Decongestion, Leticia Ayoola-Daniels working with the representative of the supporting organization; Mrs. Oyinye Ndubuisi of the UNDP are working assiduously to ensure the achievement of the laudable project,” the statement read in part.

Gwandu added that the initiative is one of the strategic interventions by the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice and indeed the Federal Government towards engendering lasting reforms in the Criminal Justice Sector in Nigeria.

According to the statement, the development is part of the process to implement the Post-Covid-19 Justice Sector Plan marshaled out by the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice in April 2020.

December 3, 2021
Supreme Court strikes out suit against virtual hearing

The Supreme Court on Tuesday struck out two suits by Lagos and Ekiti Governments challenging the validity and constitutionality of the Virtual Court Sittings procedure.

A seven man panel presided by Justice Bode Rhodes-Vivour struck out the suits after they were withdrawn by the plaintiffs.

The first suit with number: SC/CV/260/2020 filed by the Attorney General of Lagos State has the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General of the Federation and the National Assembly as the 1st and 2nd defendants respectively.

The Lagos state government in the suit prayed the Supreme Court to determine whether having regard to Section 36(1), (3) and (4) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) use of technology by remote hearings of any kind, whether by Zoom, Microsoft Teams, WhatsApp, Skype or any other audio visual or video-conference platform by the Lagos State High Court or any other Courts in Nigeria in aid of hearing and determination of cases are constitutional.

However, when the matter came up, Lagos State Attorney-General, Mr Moyosore Onigbanjo SAN, having taken hint from the apex court that the suit was speculative and preemptive withdrew the suit.

Following its withdrawal, the apex court in a unanimous decision struck it out.

However, Justice Rhodes-Vivour in his ruling held that, “As of today virtual sitting is not unconstitutional”.

“This suit is speculative and having been withdrawn, it is struck out”, he said.

The court also struck out a similar suit marked, ‘’SC/CV/261/2020’’ filed by the Attorney General of Ekiti state against the AGF, shortly after the suit was withdrawn.

Just like his Lagos counterpart, the Ekiti State AG, Mr Wale Fapounda withdrew his suit after taking the hint that the suit was preemptive.

On its part, Ekiti, challenged the constitutionality of the directive of the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami (SAN) to the Head of Courts at federal and state levels to adopt Virtual Court Sittings in courts.

Fapohunda, in the suit had asked the apex court to issue an order to annul the directive for the adoption of the Virtual or Remote Court sittings for being inconsistent with Section 1(3), 4(6), 5(2), 6(2), 36(3) and (4), 272 and 274 of the 1999 Constitution.

Ekiti State further wants the Supreme Court to determine whether the AGF’s guidelines are not a derogation from the legislative, executive and judicial law-making, law execution and adjudicatory rules making powers exclusively vested in states of the federation in respect of states courts, by virtue of Sections 1(3), 4(6), 5(2), 6(2), 272 and 272 and 274 of the Constitution.

He also prayed the apex court to decide whether Lagos and Ogun state having adopted virtual court hearings pursuant to the lockdown, the three arms of Government in Ekiti State are bound to conduct their legislative, executive and judicial functions pertaining to adjudication in state courts in compliance with the directive upon which the National Judicial Council formulated the provisions of Articles E(1) to E(13) of its Guidelines (issued on May 7, 2020).

July 14, 2020
JUST IN: Federal High Court adopts virtual court, permits Zoom, Skype, WhatsApp, email, others

The Federal High Court (FHC) of Nigeria has authorised judges to adopt virtual proceedings for court cases in all its judicial divisions.

Chief Judge (CJ) Justice John Tsoho gave the direction in the new 2020 Practice Directions for the COVID-19 Period.

But proceedings can only be held virtually with the consent of the parties and their counsels.

Also, under the new rules, FHC judges cannot hear more than nine cases in a day.

There were 36 Divisions of the court as at last July with 82 judges to hear over 200,000 pending cases.

“Virtual proceeding is hereby adopted for adjudication in the Federal High Court.

“Virtual proceedings can be either by Zoom, Skype or any other audio-visual platform approved by the Court,” the CJ said.

Where parties and counsel agree to virtual proceedings in a case, he directed them to liaise with the court’s Registrar to schedule the hearings.

Cases for virtual proceedings shall then be stated on the Cause List, posted on the FHC website and communicated to counsel and parties, either by e-mail or any other electronic means.

The Judge and counsel in such proceedings must also be robed.

The notice also responded positively to growing calls for technology to be infused in court proceedings.

“Service of court processes may be effected by e-mails, WhatsApp or as may be directed by the Court, and shall be deemed as good service.

“Service of hearing notices may be effected by e-mail, WhatsApp, text messages or as may be directed by the Court

“The print out of same shall be sufficient proof of service,” it said.

In keeping with federal and states COVID-19 regulations, the Chief Judge also made the wearing of face masks and maintaining of social distancing mandatory.

“Face Masks must be properly worn by everyone within the court premises to cover their mouths and noses at all times.

“Every person within the premises of the court and inside the court room shall observe the requirement of social and physical distancing of not less than 2 meters (6 feet) apart from each other,

“At any given time, there shall not be a congregation of more than ten (10) within the Court premises, except for purposes of court sittings.

“There shall not be more than twenty (20) persons inside the court room including the court staff and counsel at court sittings.”

These Practice Directions came into effect on May 18, 2020.

May 18, 2020
Senate introduces bill legalising virtual court proceedings

The Senate Tuesday passed for first reading , a constitution alteration bill seeking for legalisation of virtual court proceedings.

The bill titled : ‘1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Alteration) Bill, 2020 (SB. 418) , sponsored by Senator Michael Opeyemi Bamidele ( APC Ekiti Central), is aimed at ensuring the much needed corresponding amedment of relevant provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended, in giving legal teeth to virtual court proceedings.

The provisions of the bill as contained in the draft copy, include

Section 36 sub-section (3) which states thus ” this section is hereby amended by the addition of the following:

” Provided that nothing in this subsection shall invalidate proceedings of a court or the proceedings of a tribunal relating to matters mentioned in subsection (1) of this section (including the announcement of the decisions of the court or tribunal) where same is held by remote hearing or any virtual means now in existence or yet to be developed.

“Section 36 subsection (4) is hereby amended by addition of sub-paragraph (c) as follows: (c) nothing in the foregoing paragraphs shall invalidate proceedings of a court or the proceedings of a tribunal relating to matters mentioned in subsection (1) of this section (including the announcement of the decisions of the court or tribunal) where same is held by remote hearing or any virtual means now in existence or yet to be developed.

“Section 36 subsection (12) is hereby amended by addition of the following subsection (13): In this section, “remote hearing” means proceedings or hearing of court conducted via zoom, skype, whatsapp video or any other social media platform or technological innovation”.

The drafter of the bill explains further that section 36 (3) is sufficiently controversial enough now in terms of requirement of public hearing and determination of disputes.

This according to him, endangers the results of proceedings eventually held virtually. Except the amendment is done urgently, the whole judicial functions of the Nation will remain paralysed.

According to him, the bill being an urgently needed one needs to be given expeditious consideration and passage .

” It is s a case of emergency now. Upon 2nd Reading, the States can be given three days to make returns so that before the end of the month, the process is completed.

“The National Judicial Council in the wake of COVID-19 pandemic and the inability of Courts to hold courtroom proceedings, had taken steps to ensure continued administration of justice through virtual proceedings in accordance with global best practices, with some State Chief Judges coming out to openly adopt and implement the NJC guidelines.

“However, Nigerian Lawyers have been divided over this issue as there has been an ongoing debate among legal practitioners as to whether or not virtual hearing is real hearing as provided for in the Constitution while some are insisting that the word “public” in the Constitution shall continue to mean physical court room or other designated place unless and until the relevant provisions in section 36 of the Constitution are amended”, he said .

However , Senator Bamidele who is a member of the Body of Benchers,

said in the meantime, the NJC has a responsibility to work with Stakeholders to manage the current situation until we rewrite our Constitution in this regard as neither the practice direction, rules of court, nor an Act of the National Assembly

can change the legal position so that we do not bury our heads in the sand yet again until the sand is blown off by the storm of section 1, subsection 3 (inconsistency clause) of the Constitution if and when it is ignited.

He appealed for the understanding of Journalists as he insisted the details and general principles of the Bill, which just passed the first reading, must first be debated on the floor of the Senate when it comes up for second reading during the next legislative day , before it can become a matter for analysis in the media.

According to him, once copies of the Bill were distributed among Senators to enable them study the details before the next adjourned date, other Distinguished Senators would be able to make their further inputs if any, while the Bill would be subjected to public scrutiny through public hearing for Stakeholders both from the bar and the bench to actively participate in fine-tuning it as a very important piece of legislation.

May 12, 2020
Lagos: Driver bags death sentence in first virtual court sitting

Justice Mojisola Dada of an Ikeja High Court has sentenced a driver, Olalekan Hameed, to death by hanging in the first virtual court sitting held by a Lagos court as part of social distancing measures to combat the COVID-19 pandemic.

Justice Dada sentenced Hameed to death by hanging for the Dec. 1, 2018 murder of 76-year-old Mrs Jolasun Okunsanya, the mother of his employer, Adetayo.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the court session was held online via the Zoom App.

Hameed, participated from the Ikoyi Correctional Centre, Lagos, while his counsel and the prosecution team led by Lagos State Solicitor-General Ms Titilayo Shitta-Bey, participated in the session remotely from different locations.

Judicial Officers including Justice Alogba, Justice Oluwatoyin Ipaye, Justice Josephine Oyefeso, Justice Sherifat Solebo, Justice Afeez Dabiri, Justice Roli Harriman also observed the proceedings virtually.

The state’s Attorney-General & Minister of Justice, Mr Moyosore Onigbanjo (SAN) and some senior members of the bar including Mrs Funke Adekoya (SAN) Mr Tayo Oyetibo (SAN) and Mr Olukayode Enitan (SAN) also observed the proceedings.

The proceedings were approved by Chief Judge, Justice Kazeem Alogba, in line with the Lagos State Judiciary Remote Hearing of Cases COVID-19 Pandemic Period Practice Direction.

Delivering thee judgment, Justice Dada said: “It is also an established fact that although the defendant went to the house of the crime to steal.

“The surprise of the deceased stumbling upon him led him to not just pushing the deceased, but actually strangulating her in a bid to keep her from crying out.

“The case is clear, I have not found any contradiction with the evidence of the prosecution witness that can be deemed material or weighty enough to cast any doubt on the case of the prosecution against the defendant in this case.

“The facts of the case are incompatible with the innocence of the defendant but rather his guilt on the two-counts. The defendant is hereby found guilty of this count two of murder and is hereby convicted as charged and accordingly sentenced to death.

“The sentence of this court upon you, Olalekan Hameed, is that you be hanged by the neck until you be pronounced dead and may the Lord have mercy upon your soul. This is the virtual judgment of the court.”

NAN reports that Hameed was arraigned on March 6, 2019 on a two-count charge of murder and stealing in a suit with charge no. ID/9006C/2019.

According to the prosecution, the convict committed the offence at about 12:30pm at plot 83, Owukori Crescent, Alaka Estate, Surulere, Lagos.

Hameed plead not guilty and trial commenced with the witnesses testifying on behalf of the prosecution.

Exhibits were tendered during the trial including the coroner’s report, the allegedly stolen N97,500 and 117 dollars recovered from the defendant as well as his confessional statement.

Hameed, testifying in his defence during the trial, denied killing the deceased.

“The only money I took was the N1,000, any other money I don’t know about it. I did not kill Mrs Jolaso Ogunsanya,” Hakeem told the court during the trial. (

May 4, 2020