Sunday 2 March 2014

Oath system and realities of international litigation

The basis for the practice (that a deponent must appear before the Commissioner for oaths to complete the process of an affidavit) seems to lie in practice directions issued to registrars and court officers. One of such practice directions was issued to the High Court registrars of Lagos State following a publication in an edition of The PUNCH in March 2003, which bemoaned the obnoxious practice of affidavits being prepared along the roads and being sworn by proxy all over Lagos State. The insistence on that practice at the Federal High Court must have stemmed from such practice directions.
I do not have a problem with such practice directions. However, I would recommend that their strict application must be relaxed in circumstances where such deponents are litigants resident outside Nigeria or for justifiable reasons cannot appear before the Commissioner for oaths.  There are other options recognized under our Evidence Act and Oaths Act for taking an affidavit sought to be used by a litigant outside Nigeria in our courts.  Section 109 of the Evidence Act, 2011 provides that, “Any affidavit sworn before any judge, officer or other person duly authorised to take affidavits in Nigeria may be used in the court in all cases where affidavits are admissible”. Section 110 further provides that, “Any affidavit sworn in any country other than Nigeria before – (a) a judge or magistrate, being authenticated by the official seal of the court to which it is attached, or by a notary public; or (b) the duly authorised officer in the Nigerian Embassy, High Commissioner or consulate in that country, may be used in the court in all cases where affidavits are admissible.” The Oaths Act, Cap 01, Volume 12, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 in very elaborate provision of Section 11 also echoes these options.  Section 11 of the Oaths Act provides that, “(1) Any oath or affidavit required for any court or for any other purposes of registration of an instrument may be taken or made in any place out of Nigeria before any person having to administer an oath in that place. (2) The provisions of subsection (1) of this section shall apply to any declaration, or affirmation in lieu of oath or affidavit so taken or made. (3) in the case of a person having such authority by the law of a country other Nigeria, judicial and official notice shall be taken of his seal or signature affixed, impressed or subscribed to or on any such oath, declaration or affirmation.”
The world, for more than a decade now, has become a global village. Sections 109 – 110 of the Evidence Act and section 11 of the Oaths Act have embraced the phenomenon but our internal court practice particularly our oaths taking process is still far from that reality.  I understand the ‘mischief’ the current practice seeks to prevent; it is wrong and an abuse of accepted practice for the deponent to sign an affidavit elsewhere and bring it before the Commissioner for oaths for swearing or affirmation. It is worse for him to do so and send someone else to go to court and swear to an affidavit. The correct procedure is that the deponent should appear personally before the authorised persons before proceeding to sign or thumbprint the deponent’s column. It is after this that the authorised person will verify his signature by signing and stamping the affidavit. The correct procedure can still be achieved outside Nigeria without the need for the deponent to appear before the commissioner of oaths in the Nigerian Court.  A litigant outside Nigeria should be able to instruct a lawyer in Nigeria to commence a civil action without the need for him or any of his witnesses to appear before a commissioner of oaths in the intended Nigerian court to sign an affidavit or a witness deposition for his action to be accepted for filing by the registry of the court. He can depose to the affidavit before a commissioner of oaths, a judge or magistrate of a court in his country and send the original to his lawyer for filing in our court. He can also do so before a Notary Public in his country. In the case of Ayiwoh v. Akorede 20 NLR 4, a Notary Public is deemed to have credit worldwide.  The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court , the Chief Judges of the High Courts of all the states in Nigeria and that of the Federal Capital territory, the President of the Court of Appeal and the Chief Justice of Nigeria must therefore, as a matter of urgency,  issue further practice directions to enable their court officers accept affidavit sworn abroad in matters in our courts where the deponent of such affidavits is abroad and it is unjustifiable to appear to depose to such affidavits in Nigeria or where it is even unjustifiable to come to Nigeria to give evidence in support of an action e.g. where the contract or transaction are largely documentary.  The Nigerian Bar Association must also ‘force the spring’ of this reform to forestall situations where big tickets international litigation are taken elsewhere for adjudication even in clear cases where Nigerian courts can conveniently exercise jurisdiction.
• Concluded
Bello is a Lagos-based lawyer

No comments:

Post a Comment