LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW — Fundamental Rights — Right to Property and Protection Against Compulsory Acquisition Without Compensation
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Statutes which encroach on the rights of the subject, whether as regards person or property, are subject to strict construction as with Penal Acts. They should be interpreted, if possible, to respect such rights. There is a presumption that proprietary rights are not taken away without provision for compensation.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Onu, JSC, in Kotoye v. Saraki & Anor (1994) NLC-1471993(SC) at p. 34; Paras C–E.
"Statutes which encroach on the rights of the subject, whether as regards person or property, are subject to a strict construction in the same way as Penal Acts. It is a recognised rule that they should be interpreted, if possible, so as to respect such rights, and if there is any ambiguity the construction which is in favour of the freedom of the individual should be adopted. One aspect of this approach to legislation is the presumption that a statute does not retrospectively abrogate vested rights, another is the presumption that proprietary rights are not taken away without provision being made for compensation."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Statutes encroaching on personal or property rights must be strictly construed, like penal statutes. Ambiguity must be resolved in favour of individual freedom and property rights. The principle applies to constitutional and statutory interpretation. The rule presumes that vested rights are not retrospectively abrogated and proprietary rights are not taken without compensation. Courts will protect fundamental property rights against ambiguous encroachment.
