Bamidele Aturu Esq [2]
In February, 2004 the judiciary sub-committee of the Constitution Review Committee held a separate public hearing on the judiciary.

At the time I commended the sub-committee for its wisdom in holding the separate hearing mainly on the ground that as the judiciary as the third arm of government in its interpretative functions helps to define the limits of the powers of the other two arms, the executive and the legislature, and thus help consolidate liberal democracy in spite of its imperfections, the special focus on it was well founded.

The role of the judiciary cannot be taken lightly for true democracy is incompatible with absolute powers and unlimited discretion.  The fact that judicial officers have been regularly invited to intervene in political conflicts having constitutional implications underscores the pre-eminent status of the judiciary.

Thus any attempt to consolidate civilian rule and democracy in Nigeria must begin with the reform of this important arm of government.

But rather unfortunately, the country missed the opportunity provided by that exercise constitutionally to streamline the jurisdiction of the various courts.

The decision of the apex court, the Supreme Court of Nigeria in NUEE v BPE delivered on the 25th of February 2010 which held mainly that it is unconstitutional for any statute other than the Constitution to confer exclusive jurisdiction on resolution of trade disputes on the National Industrial Court has brought to the fore again the need, indeed the urgency, to deal with the jurisdiction of the National Industrial Court once and for all.

It is against this background that one attempts to address the issue of the jurisdictional confusion militating against the proper functioning of the National Industrial Court.  It is sincerely hoped that the National Assembly would find the time to reflect on the issues raised here.

A Brief History of the National Industrial Court
It is perhaps fitting to begin with a brief history of the court.  The court was established in 1976 to deal with trade disputes and help create a sustainable basis for industrial harmony.

This rationale can hardly be faulted.  There is now a global recognition of the fact that regular courts being too acculturated in strict legalism are not suited to adjudicate industrial disputes many of which by nature are interest-based, and for that reason require some elements of conciliation, arbitration and flexibility.

In short what many jurisdictions have done in the words of Sir John White is to set up labour courts that are ‘courts of law industrially informed’.  There can indeed be nothing more tragic than having with due respect industrially uninformed judges pretending to resolve trade disputes.  But that is the situation that the 1999 Constitution has thrown industrial relations in Nigeria.

But before we examine the defects of the Constitution in relation to the National Industrial Court (NIC), let us complete the legal history of the court.  The Trade Disputes Act, Cap 432, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990 that creates the Court gives it the following jurisdiction:

*section 15 of the Act confers on the court original jurisdiction to entertain application seeking the interpretation of the provisions of a collective agreement.