Christopher Chibuzor Umeania V. University Of Uyo & Ors (2013)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

UZO I. NDUKWE-ANYANWU, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Federal High Court sitting in Uyo delivered on 18th May, 2013 dismissing the suit No. FHC/UY/CS/72/2012.

The Appellant was the Applicant in that suit. The Appellant claimed against the Respondent as defendant by a motion on notice filed on 13th October, 2012 for the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights of the Applicant in terms of the Reliefs set out in paragraph 2 of the statement accompanying the Application to wit.

(a) DECLARATION that the rustication of the Applicant by the 1st-3rd Respondents vide the Respondents letter with Ref. UV/REG/DAA/SNT/VOL. 11/14 DATED Jan. 24, 2002 without fair hearing and further by the 1st – 3rd Respondents letters dated 16th September, 2008 and 27th November, 2008 in defiance of Judicial proceedings is an infraction of the Applicant’s constitutional rights to fair hearing, presumption of innocence, personal liberty, free movement and freedom from discrimination as guaranteed by Section 35, 36, 41 and 42 of chapter 4 of the 1999 Constitution as amended in 2011.

(b) An ORDER setting aside and nullifying the restriction of the Applicant by the Respondents vide letter herein above referred.

(c) A declaration that the Respondents are in breach of the constitutional/fundamental rights of the Applicant as guaranteed by Section 35, 36, 41 and 42 of chapter 4 of the 1999 Constitution as amended in 2011 by refusing to reinstate the Applicant for the award of graduate degree of Bachelors of Science in applied chemistry when the Applicant was not given opportunity to make representations to the Respondents and he was not in fact invited to make representations to the Respondents before he was allegedly rusticated and the Applicant is being subjected to in human and degradation treatment for being required to prove his innocence.

(d) A declaration that the Applicant not having been convicted by a Court of competent jurisdiction of committing any criminal offence and should not accordingly have been rusticated by the 1st -3rd Respondents thereby precluding the Applicant from being awarded a degree of Bachelors of Science in Applied Chemistry.

(e) An Order of Court directing permanently that the Applicant be reinstated as a graduate student for the award of a Bachelors degree in Applied Chemistry and an order restraining the Respondents, their agents, servants, privies Legal representatives, any person or group of person acting for and on their behalf from further refusing to reinstate the Applicant as a graduate student for the purposes of award of a Bachelors of Science degree in Applied Chemistry.

(f) N100,000,000.00 (One Hundred Million) Naira only jointly and severally against the Respondents for the torture, emotional stress and or psychological trauma and breaches of Applicant’s Fundamental Rights aforesaid occasioned by the Acts of the Respondents against the Applicant and or as a result of the Respondents breaches of the Fundamental Rights of the Applicant.

The grounds upon which these Reliefs are sought are as follows:

(a) Under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended every citizen including the Applicant is entitled to have his fundamental rights guaranteed under Sections 35, 36, 41 and 42 protected and shall not be deprived of his rights to personal liberty, fair hearing, freedom of movement and freedom from discrimination save as provided for in the said Constitution.

(b) The torture, emotional stress and psychological trauma caused against the Applicant by the Respondents by their refusal to reinstate him for the sole purpose of graduating him for the award of Bachelors of Science degree in applied chemistry after being discharged by the Court constitutes a breach of the Fundamental Right of the Applicant guaranteed by the Constitution.

(c) The actions of the Respondents acting in concert and or unilaterally were arbitrary and fragrant abuse of the Fundamental Rights of the Applicant as enshrined in the Constitution.

(d) There is no law in Nigeria permitting the Respondents to impose on the Applicant the responsibility of preferring charge in court against himself where the prosecution refuses to do so. Also there is no law that presumes the Applicant guilty until he is so found upon a charge by a Court of competent jurisdiction.