ECOWAS Court Rules Against Nigeria In Forced Eviction Case, Dismisses Religious Rights Claim

Abuja, Nigeria – The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Court of Justice issued opposing rulings in two separate cases against Nigeria.

In one case, the court held the Nigerian government liable for the forced evictions of 26 people in Lagos and Rivers states, awarding substantial compensation. In the other, a claim for violations of religious rights was dismissed.

In Mr. Edwin Lenyie & 25 Ors. v. Federal Republic of Nigeria, the court ruled in favour of the applicants, who claimed forced evictions from 2004 to 2013 without prior notice, compensation, or alternative housing.

The three-judge panel, which included Honourable Justice Ricardo Cláudio Monteiro Gonçalves (presiding judge), Honourable Justice Sengu Mohamed Koroma (judge rapporteur), and Honourable Justice Gberi-Bè Ouattara (panel member), concluded that Nigeria violated Article 7 of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights, which guarantees the right to a fair trial and access to justice.

The court rejected Nigeria’s argument that the applicants should have pursued their claims in domestic courts, stating that the Nigerian state is responsible for the actions of its agencies, even though the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) suspended proceedings indefinitely in 2014.

Each of the 26 applicants received N2 million in compensation. The court emphasised that this was about restorative justice, not punishmen

In a separate case, Priestess Lovina Amina Adonor v. Federal Republic of Nigeria, the ECOWAS Court rejected the applicant’s allegations of human rights violations.

Priestess Adonor claimed her shrine had been vandalised, she had received death threats, and Nigerian authorities had failed to provide adequate protection.

She claimed violations of her right to propagate her religion, security, and property ownership under ECOWAS and international human rights treaties.

While the court acknowledged jurisdiction and the application’s admissibility, it ultimately determined that Priestess Adonor failed to establish a direct link between the alleged violations and the Nigerian government or its agents.

The court stated that private individuals were responsible for the attack and had been detained and released following due process.

The claims under various articles of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights were dismissed due to a lack of evidence.

The court also stated that it lacked jurisdiction to rule on aspects of the case involving Nigerian national law, specifically Section 43 of the Nigerian constitution.

Both parties were ordered to cover their own costs. The panel for this case consisted of Honourable Justice Ricardo Cláudio Monteiro Gonçalves (presiding judge), Honourable Justice Sengu Mohamed Koroma (judge rapporteur), and Honourable Justice Edward Amoako Asante (panel member).

These opposing rulings highlight the intricate interplay between individual rights and state responsibility within the ECOWAS legal framework.

The forced evictions case demonstrates the court’s willingness to hold states accountable for human rights violations, whereas the dismissal of the religious rights claim highlights the high burden of proof required to establish a direct link between state action and alleged violations.