Court nullifies sections of CAMA 2020, says it is inconsistent with the constitution

Forum 1 year ago

Court nullifies sections of CAMA 2020, says it is inconsistent with the constitution

Some sections of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA), 2020 have been nullified by a federal high court sitting in Abuja, on grounds of infringing on the fundamental human rights of the Nigerian citizens.

The judgement was given following a lawsuit filed by an Abuja-based lawyer, Emmanuel Ekpenyong. He had in the lawsuit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1076/2020, sued the National Assembly, Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) and the Attorney-General for the Federation (AGF) as 1st to 3rd defendants respectively.

Asides from asking the court to determine whether he had the locus standi to institute the proceeding, Ekpeyong also asked the court to further determine whether those sections infringed on his freedom of peaceful assembly and association as enshrined in section 40 of the 1999 Constitution.

The lawsuit partly read;

“Whether the provisions of Sections 839, 842, 843, 844, 845, 846, 847, 848 and 851 of the Companies and Allied Matters Act infringes on the plaintiff’s right to thought conscience, and religion as enshrined in Section 38 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).”

He also asked the court to determine whether the provisions of the Administrative Proceeding Committee in section 851 of CAMA, 2020 was inconsistent with the provisions of Section (6)(6)(b) and Sections 36(1) and 251(1) (e) of the 1999 Constitution, and if it had powers to grant mandatory injunctive reliefs against the defendants. Ekpeyong also urged the court to void the affected sections.

Ruling on the case, Justice James Omotosho held that sections 839, 842, 843, 844, 845, 846, 847, and 848 of CAMA were inconsistent with the provisions of the Nigerian constitution.

He held that under Article 3 (e) of the Preamble to the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, anyone could bring fundamental human rights matters on his own interest, on behalf of another person or even in public interest.

Justice Omotosho also said that under the new human rights regime, a court shall not dismiss a human right action for mere want of locus standi. He held that powers granted to CAC to regulate and administer Incorporated Trustees in Nigeria under Sections 839, 842, 843, 844, Section 845, Section 846, Section 847, Section 848 of the CAMA 2020 had infringed on Mr Ekpenyong’s right to freedom of thoughts, and also infringed on the conscience and religion as enshrined under Section 38 of the constitution and freedom of peaceful assembly and association enshrined under Section 40 of the constitution and are therefore null and void.

Before striking down Sections 839, 842, 843, 844, 845, 846, 847, 848 and Section 851 of the CAMA 2020 and declaring same to be null and void, having been inconsistent with the provisions of the constitution, Justice Omotosho held that the provisions of the Administrative Proceedings Committee in Section 851 of the new CAMA denied the plaintiff his constitutional rights of access to court in sections 6 (6) (b) and Section 36 (1) of the constitution and also usurped the powers of the Federal High Court under Section 251 (1) (e) of the constitution.