Court Rules On Lagos Monthly Sanitation, May 6

A Lagos High Court sitting
at Igbosere on Tuesday, fixed May 26, for ruling on an application asking for the constitutionality of arrest and prosecution of violators of the state’s environmental sanitation laws.
The suit instituted by a student, Faith Okafor, is seeking a declaration on the legality of restricting movement of people from 7.00a.m. to 10.00 a.m. on the last Saturday of every month.
The applicant instituted the action through her counsel, Mr Ikenna Okolie, against the respondent’s (the Lagos State Government) directive to residents to observe the exercise.
The applicant also want exemplary damages in the sum of N5 million against the respondents.
The applicant further sought for a refund of N2, 000 fine she paid for an environmental sanitation offence after she was arrested and tried by a special offences court which found her guilty.
According to the applicant, her trial and conviction for an environmental sanitation offence violated her fundamental right to fair hearing as provided for under Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution.
The applicant also insisted that it violated Article 7 of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.
The applicant, therefore, wanted the court to declare the respondent’s action against her was unlawful, illegal and unconstitutional.
At the resumed hearing of the case on Tuesday, the State Solicitor-General, Mr Lawal Pedro (SAN), argued that the alleged breach of fundamental rights were “intrinsic to the trial’’ of the applicant at the magistrates’ court.
Pedro said the alleged failure to observe her fundamental rights in the process was a ground of appeal or application for judicial review and not an application for enforcement of fundamental rights.
He also argued that the applicant also failed to present to the court the said directive, saying a court of law was not obliged to speculate or entertain any hypothetical or abstract issue.
Pedro, therefore, urged the court to dismiss the application.
He said the policy of the state government for the citizens to dedicate three hours on a day monthly to perform environmental sanitation was in the public interest.
“Section 20 provides that the state shall protect and improve the environment and Section 24 (d) provides that it shall be the duty of every citizen to make positive and useful contribution to the advancement, progress and well-being of the community where he resides.
“It is, therefore, submitted that environmental sanitation policy of the state government is in the provisions of the constitution and not inconsistent with the fundamental right and dignity of human person, liberty or movement,’’ Pedro said.