Chairperson, the divisional police station, the Minister of Justice and Attorney
General
of the Respondent State and
the
Nigerian Embassy
in Germany.
In
addition, it is submitted that the EFCC in a press release also made reference to
the death of the Victim and indicated that it would be investigated.
44. The
Complainants
in
this
regard
submit
that
to
date,
"no
effective
and
independent investigation has been carried out", noting in particular that the
Victim's
cause
of
death
has
not
been
established,
no
autopsy
has
been
performed, the officers conducting the interviews have not been identified and
questioned, no indictment has been lodged, no arrests have been made and no
information on the circumstances of the Victim's death has been made available
to his family. In addition, they state that no responses were received to letters
to the EFCC and divisional police station, that the Ministry of Justice referred
the case back to the local police, who "consulted on matters regarding the case
with
the
EFCC,
the
very
body
suspected
of
being
responsible
for
Mr
Nunugwo's death."6 The Complainants also allege that while there has been
some discussion on experts suitable to conduct the post mortem and the way
to proceed, there is v i r t u a l l y no progress in the investigation.
45. Whereas the State had clearly failed in its duty to investigate, the Commission
should in addition be satisfied that the Complainants had exhausted all local
remedies
available
to
vindicate
their
rights
through
the
national
judicial
processes. The fact that the State knew or should have known of the violation
is not enough to relieve the Complainants of fulfilling this requirement. Local
remedies in this regard should be exhausted
violations
which
are
brought
before
the
in respect of the alleged rights
Commission.
Thus
it
should
be
determined whether there are any judicial remedies at domestic level which
could
have
been
pursued
by
the Complainants
to compel
the State and
its
responsible authorities to take the steps to undertake the requisite investigation
and facilitate access to justice for the rights allegedly violated. The purpose of
requiring the exhaustion of domestic remedies is to affirm the primacy of the
national
courts,
where
remedies
are
faster
attainable
and
more
readily
enforceable, with regional mechanisms f u l f i l l i n g a complementary role where
national judicial remedies are unavailable, ineffective or insufficient.
46. In the present case the Complainants have failed to indicate that they had taken
any such steps, and neither did they indicate that they approached local courts,
nor that it was impossible to do so. In this regard, the Commission takes note
from general information on the Nigerian legal system that the high courts of
Nigeria have inherent jurisdiction to supervise the proceedings and decisions
of a person or body of persons charged with the performance of a public duty,
by way of judicial review of administrative decisions, as provided
for under
Order 34 of the Federal High Court Rules 2009; and also that by virtue of the
Fundamental Rights (Enforcement) Procedure Rules and the African Chart
---'-""""-
,,,.:."
ciit��u��.
11
Eo��
� �<,'°.f,��t't,.E.TAf?l�
'See para 12 above
fl
'®
� ..
.
\
�
\.
:�
· .r ' ! ,
$"'.
p.u-UA
·
�
-<'>
·-·
(li,"'r��-S:-V-,-,';·
o,.,.,.,
"1
'I� .. ,,
;