LAGOS MULTIDOOR COURT HOUSE – LAGOS SETTLEMENT WEEK

LAGOS MULTIDOOR COURT HOUSE – LAGOS SETTLEMENT WEEK

LAGOS MULTIDOOR COURT HOUSE – LAGOS SETTLEMENT WEEK
The Lagos settlement week [hereinafter called LSW] cannot be discussed without recourse to the umbrella body which administers the settlement week. The Lagos Multidoor Court House [hereinafter called LMDC] came into existence in 2002 but it was not until 2007 that it was adopted and established as an organ of the Lagos State Government by LMDC law which came into effect on the 18th of May 2007.
The LMDC is a court connected Alternative Dispute Resolution Center with offices within the High Court of Lagos State and other suitable places.
The objectives of the LMDC are inter alia to enhance access to justice by providing alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms to supplement litigation in the resolution of disputes and to promote the growth and effective functioning of the justice system through ADR methods. The ADR mechanisms that we have include-: Mediation, Arbitration, Conciliation, Negotiation, Facilitation, Minitrial e.t.c. There are also Hybrid mechanisms like MedArb, ConArb, ConMed e.t.c . These hybrid mechanisms are a fusion of the different mechanisms we have. I would take an in-depth look into the LMDC and the different ADR mechanisms in another article because my focus here is on the LSW.
The LSW evolved as a result of a bid to popularize, encourage and mainstream ADR as a part of the disputes resolution infrastructure in Lagos State. LSW is defined in section 31 of the LMDC law of 2007 as “a week set aside by the Chief Judge of Lagos state High Court for specific courts to clear the backlog of cases through means, which include return to the LMDC for possible resolution through mediation, arbitration, neutrals evaluation or any other ADR procedure”. 
LSW was conceived to achieve three (3) objectives namely-:
Decongest the court rooms and dockets
Mainstream ADR methods
Facilitate cost effective and early resolution of cases.
The first settlement week took place in 2009; thereafter we have had subsequent editions in 2010, 2011 and the most recent one that took place in 2012 from November 5th – 9th. The key officers of the LSW are the LSW administrator, Case managers and Mediators. I would do my best to outline the frame work of the LSW. Referral of Cases- LSW involves a lot of background work which is done before the commencement of the settlement week and this usually begins with referral of cases. The courts usually refer matters with great potential for settlement. The court officers under the direction of the judge/magistrate must identify cases suitable for referral because there are some disputes which by their nature are aggravating and peculiar and may not readily lend themselves to settlement by ADR. The cause or matter identified as suitable for referral must of course be an ongoing matter, one in which the originating processes have been served and in which the other side has appeared and submitted to jurisdiction- a stage before trial commences. A question might verily come to mind and that is whether a party can suo motu (of their volition) submit to the LSW without having their matter being referred in the first instance? The answer is YES. During LSW parties or counsel whose matters were not referred can submit to mediation during the LSW. The key thing in this scenario is that parties on either side must have agreed that their matter be submitted for mediation.
Step two of the background work done before the LSW involves the Registrars of the respective courts where the matters where referred from. The Registrars make copies of the relevant documents including pleadings in the courts’ file and these are made available to the Case Managers. (Note that no Court file is taken out of the court at no time and not for any reason). Duplicate files are created for each matter to keep track of by the case managers. At this stage Case managers are to take an in-depth (screen) look into the matters referred to the LMDC for mediation during the LSW.
Who is a Case Manager? – He or she is a person with a highly developed oral and written communication style that enables the elicitation of information in a non- abrasive manner. A case manager helps identify appropriate doors for the resolution of disputes, discusses and advices the disputants on the available doors and is responsible for all the planning and facilitation towards ensuring that the disputants can access the recommended dispute resolution doors.When the case managers are done screening to determine the suitability of matters for LSW, the matters are then classed into suitable and non-suitable groups for LSW. 
The outcome of the screening by the case managers screening is then sent to the respective judges/magistrates (referral courts) identifying the matters suitable for LSW and those not suitable. The next step is that Hearing notices are issued by Registrars of courts to parties in respect of those matters classed as suitable for the LSW. The parties and counsel alike are to appear before the judge/magistrate who then must elicit cooperation of parties and counsel (judge/magistrate informs parties and counsel of the referral of their matters to the LMDC for LSW). Parties or Counsel therefore fill out a submission form and tick suitable dates on which they want their matters to be mediated on. Enrolment of order forms is filled and signed by the judege/magistrate which is the formal referral of the matter to the LMDC.
Mediators- Experienced mediators are usually selected to mediate on matters during the LSW. Even with their experience, the mediators selected are still made to go through training/workshop in preparation for the LSW. Mediation sessions are then scheduled; parties and counsel alike are informed on the date(s) their sessions would come up. 
During the sessions parties are given room to air or talk about the root cause of the matters which went on to court. Matters which cannot be settled during a particular session are adjourned for other sessions until an amicable settlement is arrived at. When a matter is settled, the Case manager handling the particular file draws up terms of settlement accordance with the agreement reached by parties during the mediation session. The terms of settlement is then entered as consent judgment in court by the judge/magistrate from whose court the matter was referred from.
It is important to note that ADR has come to stay therefore it is very key for counsel to embrace ADR wholeheartedly. ADR has not come to supplant or displace litigation; it has only come to make way for speedy and easy access to justice. Also worthy of note is the fact that LSW is absolutely free.
LSW is coming up again sometime this year. I strongly advice counsel and parties alike to make good use of this opportunity to ensure that their matters are mediated upon to ensure fast resolution of disputes.
                                                                                                                               

O.C. Igbanor Esq.

                                                                                                                               

igbanorosi@gmail.com

CONTACT US

Find Legalnaija on any of your social networks:

Twitter: @legalnaija

Facebook: www.facebook.com/legalnaija

Email: info@legalnaija.com

Number: +2348055424566.  +447919681524

(OPINION) #CHILDNOTBRIDE CAMPAIGN: MISGUIDED OR MISUNDERSTOOD?

(OPINION) #CHILDNOTBRIDE CAMPAIGN: MISGUIDED OR MISUNDERSTOOD?

The social media was agog with so much frenzy when news of what transpired in the Senate in the past week hit the media streets. I have received not less than 50 broadcasts on bbm from people claiming to be massively involved in the fight against the passage of a bill to legalize under-age marriage. I was shocked when I read most of these broadcasts and was greatly depressed because I realized that we Nigerians are an ignorant lot!


If people spent half the time they do reading newspapers, listening to the news on the radio and watching news on TV or actually visiting google more often for current news headlines rather than reading gossip columns like Linda Ikeji’s blog and other gossip media, they would be more informed. For Linda Ikeji’s teeming fans, this is not a swipe at Linda Ikeji but a swipe at those of you who take her stories as the gospel truth. Y’all need to learn the difference between gossip and fact!



Contrary to what many people think as regards the issue, there wasn’t an actual bill to legalize under-age marriage. What happened was during the on-going constitutional amendment carried on by the National Assembly, with specific regard to Section 29 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the Senate Committee sought to amend the subsection.


Section 29 (1) provides thus;


“Any citizen of Nigeria of full age who wishes to renounce his Nigerian citizenship shall make a declaration in the prescribed manner for the renunciation”


Section 29 (4) further states thus;


“For the purposes of subsection (1) of this section
(a) “Full age” means the age of eighteen years and above;
(b) Any woman who is married shall be deemed to be of full age.” (Emphasis mine).


A probable but unwise implication of this subsection is that a girl who gets married at the age of 13 or less is of full age and can decide to change her citizenship regardless of her mental capacity. The Senate Committee was of the opinion that the provision should be expunged because of this ambiguity. This is where the problem started.


Senator Ahmed Yerima who we all know as a “staunch” defender of Sharia Law swung into action saying that the section was against the tenets of Islam. I am no expert in Islamic affairs, but this in my opinion however, was no defense of Islam but the defense of his lecherous whims especially in the light of his condemnable marriage to a 13 year old Egyptian girl in 2009. His view is that once a girl is married, she has full mental capacity to renounce her citizenship and understand the implication thereof.


This, my friends, is a shitload of bollocks! I’ll tell you why.


In all the hue and cry that followed, we all forgot something – and this is often the case when religion and emotions get involved in arguments; we skip the salient points; the subsection said “woman” and not “girl”. The wording of the sub-section is clear and unambiguous. Except “Hon”Yerima and the other Senators who missed this are trying to tell me that the word “woman” is a synonym for “girl”, what’s all the fuss about?


For the “unlearned”, any question of statutory interpretation begins with looking at the plain language of the statute to discover its original intent. To discover a statute’s original intent, courts first look to the words of the statute and apply their usual and ordinary meanings. Only when that fails, can we deem such a statute to be ambiguous before recourse can be had to the intent of the legislature when making the law or other methods of statutory interpretation.


Amazingly, Ahmed Yerima gathered a few followers with this warped sense of logic and when it came up for a second vote, though the majority of senators voted that the subsection be expunged, they couldn’t get the required two-thirds majority to expunge as provided for by Section 9(2) of the constitution which states thus; 


Section 9(2)  “An Act of the National Assembly for the alteration of this Constitution… shall not be passed in either House of the National Assembly unless the proposal is supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds majority of all the members of that House and approved by resolution of the Houses of Assembly of not less than two-thirds of all the states.”


Therefore, in this regard, the majority of the Senate only failed to expunge the subsection because of the requirement of the above mentioned Section 9(2) which basically gave Yerima and his cohorts the power to hold the rest of the Senate to ransom. However, this attempt to expunge the subsection, though noble is misguided.


That being said, The Child Rights Act was passed into law in 2003 and Section 277 defines a child as anyone below 18 years of age. Also, Sections 21 and 22 of the Act effectively criminalizes child marriage and betrothal in Nigeria. What needs to be done is to push for The Child Rights Act to be domesticated in every one of the 36 states in Nigeria.


As at today, 12 states are yet to domesticate The Child Act and apart from Enugu State, the rest of them are states from the North. This in my opinion, is a deliberate ploy to undermine the efficacy of the Act. 


Furthermore, any court that makes the mistake of towing the line of the thoughts of our obviously “unlearned” senators who sought to expunge the Section 29(4)(b) of the Constitution poses a serious threat to the applicability and enforceability to the Act as all enacted laws that are inconsistent with the constitution are void the extent of their inconsistency because the Constitution is the grund norm of the nation and is supreme to any other law enacted.  


 Section 1(1) provides, “This Constitution and its provisions shall have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout the Federal Republic of Nigeria”.


In addition to this, Section 1(3) provides, “If any other law is inconsistent with the provisions of this Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail and that other law shall to the extent of the inconsistency be void.”


For avid social media users, please be selective in the information that you consume and take as fact.


This is my two kobo on the issue.


Malcolm O. Ifi.