The Incorporated Trustees NBA v. A.G Federation & Ors (2024)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

JOSEPH OLUBUNMI KAYODE OYEWOLE, JCA (Delivering the leading judgment)

This is in respect of an appeal against the decision of the Federal High Court, Abuja Division delivered on the 21st February, 2022 by Ekwo, J.

The appellant approached the lower court via an originating summons the 15th February, 2021 where it sought a determination of the following questions:

1. Whether the provisions of Regulation 127 of the Nigeria Police Regulations made pursuant to the Police Act, Cap 19 Laws of the Federal of Nigeria, 2004, to the extent that it provides that “an unmarried woman police officer who becomes pregnant shall be discharged from the force, and shall not be re-enlisted except with the approval of the Inspector General of Police” does not violently contravene the provisions of sections 37 & 42 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) and therefore unconstitutional, null and void.
2. Whether the provisions of Regulation 126 of the Nigeria Police Regulations made pursuant to the Police Act, Cap 19 laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, to the extent that it provides that “A married woman police officer who is pregnant may be granted maternity leave in accordance with the provisions of general orders” (and taking into consideration Regulation 127 of the Nigeria Police Regulations) does not violently contravene the provisions of sections 37 & 42 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) and therefore unconstitutional, null and void.
3. Whether the provisions of Regulations 126 and 127 of the Nigeria Police Regulations made pursuant to Police Act, Cap 19 Laws of the Federal of Nigeria, 2004, are not violent contraventions of the provisions of articles 2, 3, 5, 18, & 19 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratifications and Enforcement) Act (Cap A9), LFN, 2004.

It then sought the following reliefs:

1. A declaration that the provisions of Regulation 127 of the Nigeria Police Regulations made pursuant to the Police Act, Cap 19 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 to the extent that it provides that “an unmarried woman police officer who becomes pregnant shall be discharged from the Force, and shall not be re-enlisted except with the approval of the Inspector General of Police” violently contravenes the express provisions of sections 37 and 42 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) and therefore unconstitutional, null and void.
2. A declaration that the provisions of Regulation 127 of the Nigeria Police Regulations made pursuant to the Police Act. Cap 19 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 to the extent that it provides that “an unmarried woman police officer who becomes pregnant shall be discharged from the Force, and shall not be re-enlisted except with the approval of the Inspector General of Police” violently contravenes the express provisions of articles, 2, 3, 5, 18 & 19 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and therefore unlawful, null and void.
3. A declaration that the provisions of Regulation 126 of the Nigeria Police Regulations made pursuant to the Police Act, Cap 19 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 to the extent that it provides that “A married woman police officer who is pregnant may be granted maternity leave in accordance with the provisions of general orders” violently contravenes the express provisions of sections 37 and 42 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) and articles 2, 3, 5, 18 & 19 of the African Charter on Hunan and peoples’ Rights, and therefore unlawful, null and void.
4. A declaration that the practical implementation of the provisions of Regulations 126 and 127 of the Police Regulations made pursuant to the Police Act, Cap 19 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 or any similar provision by the defendants amounts to discrimination against all unmarried women (female) police officer in the Nigeria Police force on the grounds of sex and circumstances of birth, which are contrary to the provisions of sections 37 & 42 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) and articles 2, 3, 5, 18 & 19 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights; and therefore unconstitutional, null and void.
5. A declaration that the provisions of Regulation 127 of the Nigeria Police Regulations made pursuant to the Police Act, Cap 19 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 that provides that “an unmarried woman police officer who becomes pregnant shall be discharged from the Force, and shall not the reenlisted except with the approval of the Inspector General of Police” is inconsistent with the provisions of sections 4(a) & 140 (6) of the Nigeria Police Act, 2020, and therefore null and void.
6. A declaration that the provisions of Regulation 126 of the Nigeria Police Regulations made pursuant to the Police Act, Cap 19 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 that provides that “A married woman police officer who is pregnant may be granted maternity leave in accordance with the provisions of general orders” is inconsistent with the provisions of sections 4(a) & 140(6) of the Nigeria Police Act, 2020, and therefore null and void.
7. A declaration that the provision of Regulation 126 of the Nigeria Police Regulations made pursuant to the Police Act, Cap 19 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 that provides that “A married woman police officer who is pregnant may be granted maternity leave in accordance with the provisions of general orders” discriminates against unmarried women police officers who are and/or may be pregnant is inconsistent with the provisions of sections 4(a) & 140(6) of the Nigeria Police Act, 2020, and therefore null and void.
8. A declaration that all unmarried women (female) police officers in the Nigeria Police Force are entitled to maternity leave and same facilities that are accorded married women police officers.
9. An order of this honourable court striking down Regulations 126 and 127 of the Nigeria Police Regulations made pursuant to the Police Act, Cap 19 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, as same is in violent conflict with the provisions of section 37 & 42 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).
10. An order directing the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants to accord, avail, provide for and make available to all unmarried women police officers in the Nigeria Police Force all amenities/facilities that they are entitled to under the Nigeria Labour Act and as applicable to married women police officers in the Nigeria Police Force.
11. An order of perpetual injunction restraining the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants either by themselves and/or through their subordinates, agents, officials and servants from further carrying into effect the purported provisions of Regulations 126 and 127 of the Nigeria Police Regulations made pursuant to the Police Act, Cap 19 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 or any similar provision; and/or suspend, dismiss or in any way subject any unmarried women police officers in the Nigeria Police Force to any deprivation/disciplinary action on the ground of being pregnant while still serving in the Nigeria Police Force.

The 1st respondent joined issues with the appellant via a counter-affidavit filed on the 23rd March, 2021. After taking the arguments of counsel, the learned trial Judge delivered a judgment as aforesaid on the 21st February, 2022 wherein the appellant’s action was dismissed for lacking in merit.

Dissatisfied, the appellant invoked the appellate jurisdiction of this court via a notice of appeal filed on the 15th March, 2022 containing six grounds. At the hearing of the appeal, Mr. Lawal adopted the appellant’s brief filed on the 10th June, 2022 as well as the appellant’s reply brief filed on the 8th February, 2024 but deemed properly filed and served on the 19th February, 2024 as the arguments of the appellant in furtherance of its appeal. For the respondents, Mr. Agbe adopted their joint brief filed on the 2nd February, 2024 but deemed properly filed and served on the same 19th February, 2024 as the arguments of the respondents in contesting the appeal.

The appellant distilled two issues for determination thus:

i. Whether the trial court erred in law and occasioned a miscarriage of justice when it failed to make any pronouncement on the inconsistency of regulation 126 and 127 of the Nigeria Police Regulations with the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and the provisions of the African Charter on Human and People’s Right but held that Regulation 127 of the Nigeria Police Regulations cannot be invalidated as it is not in violation of the interest of public order or morality. (Distilled from grounds 1, 2 & 3 of the notice of appeal),

ii. Whether the trial court erred in law when it held that a grant of the reliefs of the appellant will lower the moral and professional standard of the Force as the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria does not provide any protection for pregnant unmarried police officers and the appellant’s interpretation of the provisions of section 42 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is to promote absurdity or mislead the public. (Distilled from grounds 4, 5 and 6 of the notice of appeal).

The respondents distilled three issues for determination thus:

i. Whether the learned trial Judge made accurate and sufficient pronouncement on the constitutionality of Regulations 126 and 127 of the Nigeria Police Regulations in coming to the conclusion that the regulations are not inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended. (Distilled from grounds 2 & 3).

ii. Whether the appellant’s perceived interpretation of section 42 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria does not promote absurdity. (Distilled from grounds 4, 5 & 6).

iii. Whether considering the circumstances of this case and the nature of the Nigeria Police Force, the alleged victim of discrimination cannot be deemed to have consented to the regulations of the Force. (Distilled from ground 1).

It seems to me from a proper consideration of the two sets of issues that the issues distilled by the appellant are sufficient to dispose of the contentions between the parties in this appeal and that the two issues should be taken together.