CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — Bail — Treasonable Felony — Threat to National Security — Relevance
Principle Statement
In cases involving treasonable felony or where national security is under serious threat, the right to personal liberty of the accused takes second place. The corporate existence and security of the nation are paramount and can justify the suspension of individual liberties until the threat is contained.
Ratio Decidendi (Source)
Per Muhammad, JSC, in Dokubo-Asari v. FRN (2007) NLC-123-208-2006(SC) at pp. 26–27; Paras D–A.
"Where National Security is threatened or there is the real likelihood of it being threatened human rights or the individual right of those responsible take second place. Human rights or individual rights must be suspended until the National Security can be protected or well taken care of. … The corporate existence of Nigeria as a united, harmonious, indivisible and indissoluble sovereign nation is certainly greater than any citizen's liberty or right. Once the security of this nation is in jeopardy and it survives in pieces rather than in peace, the individual's liberty or right may not even exist."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes a hierarchy of values where national security overrides individual liberty, particularly in cases of serious offences like treasonable felony. The State can justify restrictive measures, including denial of bail, to protect its sovereignty and public order. However, this principle is not a blank check; the threat must be real, and the restriction must be proportionate and limited in time. The principle has been invoked in terrorism and secessionist cases. It underscores that the enjoyment of fundamental rights is predicated on the existence of a secure and peaceful nation.
