The Child's Right to Basic Education in Nigeria: A Commentary on the Decision in SERAP v. Nigeria
| Published date | 01 November 2018 |
| DOI | 10.3366/ajicl.2018.0252 |
| Author | |
| Date | 01 November 2018 |
| Pages | 639-648 |
The right to education is not justiciable in Nigeria by virtue of it being included in Chapter II of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) (CFRN 1999) as a directive principle of state policy. This is evidenced in the case of
Nigeria is a party to several international human rights instruments that guarantee the right to basic education such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR),
The purpose of this article is to critically review the case of
The case of
1. Every individual shall have the right to education. 2. Every individual may freely, take part in the cultural life of his community. 3. The promotion and protection of morals and traditional values recognized by the community shall be the duty of the State.
Although the African Commission is yet to provide any clarification on the content and scope of the right, one can be guided by the General Comments issued by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR). In its General Comment 13, the Committee has noted that the essential elements of the right to education include availability, accessibility, acceptability and adaptability.The genesis of the matter before the court centred on the mismanagement of funds allocated for basic education in ten states of Nigeria, which had the effect of denying over five million children access to basic education. The plaintiff also alleged other factors such as failure to train more teachers and non-availability of books and other teaching materials as militating against access to basic education in Nigeria. The federal government was alleged to have contributed to these problems by failing to seriously address all allegations of corruption at the highest levels of government and the levels of impunity that facilitate corruption in Nigeria. This, they allege, has contributed to a denial of the right to education. Relying on Article 4(g) of the Revised Treaty of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) as well as Article 17 of the African Charter, the plaintiff submitted that the first defendant had violated the right to education. The relief sought among others was a declaration that every Nigerian child is entitled to free, compulsory education by virtue of Article 17 of the African Charter, section 15 of the CRA 2003 and section 2 of the UBE Act.
The second defendant challenged the jurisdiction of the court on the ground that the CRA 2003 and the UBE Act are municipal laws and not treaties, hence not within the jurisdiction of the court. It also contended that the educational objective of Nigeria is contained in section 18(1) which is a...
To continue reading
Request your trial