Thesis Abstract

Abstract
The immunity clause under the Nigerian 1999 Constitution has been a subject of significant debate and controversy in the country's political and legal spheres. This provision grants immunity to the President, Vice President, Governors, and Deputy Governors from civil and criminal prosecution during their tenure in office. The rationale behind this immunity is to ensure that these high-ranking officials can effectively perform their duties without fear of harassment or distraction from legal proceedings. This research paper critically examines the implications of the immunity clause on accountability, transparency, and the rule of law in Nigeria. By analyzing relevant case studies and legal precedents, the study explores the extent to which the immunity clause has been used to shield public officials from accountability for corrupt practices and human rights abuses. Furthermore, the paper assesses the impact of the immunity clause on the fight against corruption and the overall governance system in Nigeria. Moreover, this research delves into the constitutional validity of the immunity clause in light of its potential conflict with the principles of democracy and good governance. By comparing Nigeria's immunity provisions with those of other countries, the study seeks to provide a comprehensive understanding of the legal and political implications of immunity for public officials. The research also investigates the debate surrounding the desirability of the immunity clause in the Nigerian context. Proponents argue that immunity is necessary to protect sitting officials from politically motivated legal actions that could undermine governance and stability. On the other hand, critics contend that immunity fosters a culture of impunity and hinders efforts to hold public officials accountable for their actions. In conclusion, this research paper offers insights into the complexities and controversies surrounding the immunity clause under the Nigerian 1999 Constitution. By examining various perspectives and legal arguments, the study contributes to the ongoing discourse on the role of immunity in promoting good governance, accountability, and the rule of law in Nigeria.

Thesis Overview

GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1.0.0: INTRODUCTION Immunity clause under the Nigerian Constitution being a curse or a blessing is not only a current topic but equally controversial and intriguing. After several years of military rule, Nigeria has returned to a democratic rule since 29 May, 1999. However, the experience so far since Nigeria has returned to democratic rule shows that all has not been well with our democratic experience, especially as it affects the immunity of chief executives from judicial proceedings. Of interest to this writer was the statement made by General Muhammed Buhari (Rtd.) former Nigeria military Head of State and the Presidential candidate of a political party during the 2011 elections on March 1st 2011,he said:We will amend the Constitution to remove immunity from prosecution for elected officers in criminal cases.Preliminary, the first question that comes to our mind is what is immunity in this context? According to Bola Ajibola (SAN),the answer to this question is simple; ‘it is nothing but another word for exemption’. It is this immunity that is enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution. Hence, we have the immunity clause under section 308 of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution.The section has provided for the immunity of President,Vice President,Governors and their deputies. Thus, since the Constitution was passed into law, it becomes our Fons et Origo and so with the immunity clause in it. It is believed that the Constitution must at all time cardinally be our shield and sword, it must at all time protect all the citizen of this nationwide;female,male,young or old,fair play,human rights,as well as sustaining the rule of law. When in our national anthem we say ‘the nation bound in freedom peace and unity’,the only juristic guarantee for that is our Constitution. Akin to this is the concept of rule of law which establishes that all men are equal before the law. This postulation became a doctrine well established by Dicey via; the Supremacy of the rule of law of the land and equality before the law. In summary, no man should be placed above the law, rather every man whatever his or her position in life in the country is subject to the ordinary law of the land in the country. It is against this backdrop that this writer find it pertinent to check whether the immunity clause which has passed the test of supremacy having being enshrined in the Constitution, has also passed the test of equality before the law,that is,does the immunity clause not make some people ‘untouchable rabbits’? Here in this work, after examining the nomenclature of the immunity clause,we will see whether it is hindering the development of this country(a curse)or if it is advancing the course of the country (a blessing). Recommendation will now be made on the exercise of the doctrine in order to fine tune it to the demands of democratic governance in Nigeria.