The Supreme Court say the holding of virtual sitting by courts across the country in accordance with the practice directions issued by heads of courts is not unconstitutional at the moment.
A seven-man panel of the apex court, led by Justice Olabode Rhodes-Vivour, held that the suits filed by Lagos and Ekiti states, which sought the interpretation of the Constitution on whether or not virtual court proceedings/sitting is constitutional, are premature.
The Supreme Court urged judges across the country to continue the conduct of virtual proceedings, where it is comfortable for them, until the National Assembly concludes its effort to amend the Constitution to accommodate virtual proceedings.
It held that it was premature to challenge the constitutionality or otherwise of virtual court proceedings because the National Assembly was still in the process of amending the Constitution or enact a law to that effect.
Addressing the apex court, Justice Commissioner and Attorney General of Lagos State, Moyosore Onigbanjo (SAN), whose case was called first, argued that the state’s suit was to prevent a situation where, after virtual proceedings are conducted, they would be declared unconstitutional, as it was in the Orji Uzor Kalu case.
In the Kalu case, the Supreme Court held that the fiat given by the President of the Court of Appeal to a Justice of the Court of Appeal, who was elevated to the appellate court, to return to the Federal High Court to conclude the trial of Kalu and two others, was unconstitutional and proceeded to void the entire proceedings.
0 Comments