By  Dayo Benson

Going by Section 8(4) of the constitution of the Federation, has the Court the jurisdiction to excise a community from it’s present local government to another local government based on agitation, without the process of boundary adjustment as the law requires.

– Austin Neme

In answering the question, one may need to ask: What is the status of the community in question? Are members of the community settlers or customary tenants? If they are either of the above, a judgment of court of competent jurisdiction can indeed excise  community based on the facts in issue. Certainly, mere agitation could not have been the main reason which the court relied on to arrive at its decision.

The option opened to the excised community is to appeal the judgment up to the apex court if it is dissatisfied. A court judgment is the law until it is set aside by a Superior Court.

The issue of boundary adjustment as provided in Section 8(4) of the 1999 Constitution will not in any way stand on the way of the judgment.

Rather, it is the state house of assembly that will take legislative notice of the Court judgment and adjust their boundaries accordingly. For the purpose of other readers, Section 8(4) provides that “A bill for a Law of a House of Assembly for the purpose of boundary adjustment of any existing local government area shall only be passed if- (a) a request for the boundary adjustment is supported by two-thirds majority of members (representing the area demanding and the area affected by the boundary adjustment) in each of the following, namely- (i) the House of Assembly in respect of the area, and (ii) the local government council in respect of the area, is received by the House of Assembly; and (b)  a proposal for the boundary adjustment is approved by a simple majority of members of the House of Assembly in respect of the area concerned.”

Resignation without due notice

Is it legal to demand payment of money from an employee in lieu of his resigning without due notice?

– Nkemakolam

Every contract of employment has its own terms and conditions. Usually, a letter of employment issued to a new employee spells out these especially in privately owned companies. One of such conditions is that the employment can be terminated by either of the parties, that is, employer or employee giving one month notice.

Because it is the basic requirement wishes to employer terminate the contract with immediate effect, which is usually the case, it is required by law to pay one month salary to the employee in lieu of notice apart from other entitlement if any.

Similarly, if the termination is at the instance of the employee without due notice, the employee is expected to forfeit one month salary from his or her entitlement if there is any.

Where the employee is not entitled to any financial obligation, then he or she is required to pay the one month salary to the employer in lieu of notice. If this is not done it is legal for the employer to demand it.

Delta Guber petition: Is this justice?
What is the hope of the common man if he can be denied justice by the courts (lower, Appeal court and Supreme Court).

Take for example, the Delta State governorship election petitions between Dr. Uduaghan and Great Ogboru. Where do we go from here?
– Dr. Oke, Sapele

Justice is as the way the courts see it based on pieces of evidence before them and not the way it ought to be in the eyes of the common man. That is why the godess of justice is blindfolded. Unfortunately, there is no where to go after Supreme Court except to God.