CHAPTER ONE
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
This study deals with how the soldier is subjected to tripartite laws
namely: military law, civil law and international law. The soldier upon
acquisition of military status, did not only subject himself to a tripartite
legal status, but also added onto himself additional legal responsibilities
distinct from the civilian. The English Court in confirmation of the above
fact, said a soldier does agree and consent that he shall be subject to the
military discipline and cannot appeal to the civil courts to rescue him from
his own compact.1 The English court decision is no different with the legal status of a
soldier in Nigeria except that during the military rule, application of civil
laws in the case of the soldier was restricted. The advent of the military into
political arena in Nigeria, application of civil laws on the soldier was
restricted. Various military decrees promulgated during the first and second
phases of military rules in Nigeria prevented the soldier from appealing the
decisions of courts martial to the court of Appeal.2 The decrees provided that all
cases of appeal from courts martial pending before the court of Appeal should
abate.3 The respective service councils of the armed forces shall hear and
determine appeal from courts martial as the final body.4 This was the position of the
soldier‟s legal status under the military administration in Nigeria.
The transition of Nigeria from military rule to a democratically elected
government on 29th May, 1999, has not only generated far reaching implications on the
political, social and economical sectors but has equally implemented the
hitherto tripartite legal status of the soldier.
One major implication of the restoration of the soldier‟s tripartite
legal status is that, things have to be done in a more generally acceptable way
that conforms to the rule of law and international standards.5 Another implication is that both
civil and military thoughts, processes and practices have to conform to the
democratic dispensation as against arbitrariness characteristics of military
rules.6 As a result, soldiers have constantly challenged the decision of
Courts-Martial at the Court of Appeal and even up to the Supreme Court to
enforce their rights. In addition, where a soldier feels himself being wronged
by the military authority or a fellow service personnel, he has the right to
seek redress at any civil court with jurisdiction to hear and determine the
matter.7 However, before embarking on such rights he must first exhaust internal
administrative remedies. The effect of enforcing this right of redress in civil
court, has immensely turn around military justice system to conform with
democratic rule.
The soldier is a citizen of Nigeria hence the constitution is binding on
him.8 Being a soldier, he does not cease to be a citizen of Nigeria. He has
all the rights and duties as the ordinary civilian enshrined in the CFRN 1999
in addition to his military status. He has the right to enjoy all civil laws
either in his personal capacity or as a body corporate. He can engage in a
contract, commercial trade, purchase of immoveable properties and so forth like
the civilian. If he commits an offence, he can be tried by the civil courts and
punished under our Criminal Code9, Penal Code10, Money Laundering Act11 and all other penal laws. Also if he commits a civil wrong (tort), he
can be sued in the civil court for his tortuous act. It is for this reason we
said that a citizen who joins the military service, is neither immune
from the jurisdiction of civil laws nor civil courts.12
In addition, the soldier owes the state civic duties like the civilian. These duties such as respect for the constitution and its ideals, respect for dignity of other citizens and the right and legitimate interest of others, rendering assistance and declaration of asset and so forth.13 Where he fails to uphold this civil duties, he will be held liable for his conduct
The soldier also enjoys fundamental human rights like the civilians as
enshrined in the CFRN 1999.15 The only difference is that his rights can highly be restricted or
derogated due to exigencies of service distinct from the civilian. These
exigencies may arise as a result of defence, public order, morality or health.16 However, it should be noted that
the restriction of the soldier‟s fundamental human rights as a result of
exigencies of service is not in anyway and alienation of these rights.