LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CRIMINAL LAW — Jurisdiction — Trial of Armed Robbery Offences — High Court Jurisdiction Under 1979 Constitution
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
By virtue of the 1979 Constitution and Decree No. 105 of 1979, offences under the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act No. 47 of 1970 became triable in the High Court of the State concerned, not in Tribunals.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Onu, JSC, in Eyisi & Ors v. State (2000) NLC-1601999(SC) at p. 8; Paras A–B.
"By virtue of the provisions of Section 274(4)(b) of the 1979 Constitution, the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act No. 47 of 1970 became an Existing Law of the State and Robbery per se, a residual matter, while the Act as amended was deemed to have been made by the House of Assembly and that in view of this, offences under the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act No. 47 of 1970 as amended, are not Federal but state offences."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Under the 1979 Constitution, the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act became an Existing Law of the State. Robbery became a residual matter (state offence). The State High Court acquired jurisdiction to try armed robbery offences. Decree No. 105 of 1979 amended the Act to provide that offences shall be triable in the High Court of the State concerned. The change reflected the federal/state division of powers under the 1979 Constitution. The principle ensures that trials commenced in High Courts were valid. Part-heard trials were preserved by subsequent military decrees. The jurisdiction of the High Court to try armed robbery under this regime is settled law. The decision provides historical clarity on jurisdictional transitions.