151/96 Civil Liberties Organisation / Nigeria
Summary of Facts
1. In March 1995, the Federal Military Government of Nigeria announced that it had discovered a plot to
overthrow it by force. By the end of the month, several persons including civilians and serving and retired
military personnel had been arrested in connection with the alleged plot.
2. A Special Military Tribunal was established under the Treason and Treasonable Offences (Special
Military Tribunal) Decree, which precluded the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts. The Military Tribunal was
headed by Major-General Aziza, and composed of five serving military officers. The tribunal used the rules
and procedures of a Court-Martial, and no appeal lay from its judgement. The tribunal??ÂÂs decision
was only subject to confirmation by the Provisional Ruling Council, the highest decision making body of the
military government.
3. The trials were conducted in secret, and the suspects were not given the opportunity to state their
defence or to have access to lawyers or their families. They were not made aware of the charges against
them until their trial. The Federal Military Government appointed military lawyers to defend the suspects.
4. Thirteen civilians tried by the tribunal were convicted for being accessories to treason and sentenced to
life imprisonment. These were: Dr Beko Ransome-Kuti, Mallan Shehu Sanni, Mr Ben Charles Obi, Mrs
Chris Anyanwu, Mr George Mba, Mr Kunle Ajibade, Alhaji Sanusi Mato, Mr Julius Badejo, Mr Matthew
Popoola, Mr Felix Mdamaigida, Miss Rebecca Onyabi Ikpe, and Mr Moses Ayegba. Miss Queenette Lewis
Alagoe was convicted as an accessory after the fact and sentenced to 6 months imprisonment. The life
sentences were later reduced to 15 years imprisonment.
5. The communication alleges that since their arrest, the accused have been held under inhuman and
degrading conditions. They are held in military detention places, not in the regular prisons, and are still
deprived of access to their lawyers and families. They are held in dark cells, given insufficient food and no
medicine or medical attention.
Complaint
6. The Complainant alleges violations of Articles 5, 7(1)(a), 7(1)(c), 7(1)(d) and 26 of the African Charter.
Procedure
7. The communication is dated 19th January 1996 and was received at the Secretariat on 29th January
1996.
8. At the 20th Session held in Grand Bay, Mauritius, in October 1996, the Commission declared the
communication admissible, and decided that the planned mission to Nigeria should take it up with the
relevant authorities. The Mission took place between 7th and 14th March 1997 and the report was submitted
to the Commission.
9. The parties were kept informed of all the procedures.
Law
Admissibility
10. Article 56 of the Charter reads: Communications... shall be considered if they:??ÂÂ? Article 56(5) Are
sent after exhausting local remedies, if any, unless it is obvious that this procedure is unduly prolonged.
11. This is just one of the seven conditions specified by Article 56, but it is the one that usually requires the
most attention. Because Article 56 is necessarily the first to be considered by the Commission, before any
substantive consideration of communications, it has already been the subject of substantial interpretation;
in the jurisprudence of the African Commission, there are several important precedents.
12. Specifically, in four decisions the Commission has already taken concerning Nigeria, Article 56(5) is
analysed in terms of the Nigerian context. Communication 60/91 (Decision ACHPR/60/91) concerned the
Robbery and Firearms Tribunal; Communication 87/93 (Decision ACHPR/87/93) concerned the Civil
1