CONSTITUTIONAL LAW — Fundamental Rights — Fair Hearing — Breach of Section 36(7) Distinguished from Breach of Section 36(6)(e)
Principle Statement
The breach of section 36(7) of the Constitution alone is not sufficient to vitiate the trial. Every case will be decided on its particular facts. Breach of section 36(7) will not attract the same penalty as a breach of section 36(6)(e) to vitiate the trial.
Ratio Decidendi (Source)
Per Kutigi, JSC, in Ogidi & Ors v. State (2005) NLC-2032003(SC) at p. 26; Paras A–B.
"The breach of section 36(7) of the Constitution alone, is not sufficient to vitiate the trial. And I so hold. Every case will have to be decided based on its particular facts and circumstances only. The breach of section 36(7) will not therefore, attract the same penalty as a breach of section 36(6)(e) to vitiate the trial."
Explanation / Scope
Breach of section 36(7) (record-keeping) does not automatically vitiate trial like breach of section 36(6)(e) (right to interpreter). Each case depends on its particular facts. The principle applies to constitutional law and fair hearing. The rule distinguishes between different fair hearing violations. Not every procedural irregularity nullifies proceedings. The court examines the specific provision breached and its effect.
