Military Law

• Pages: 225-236

Court martial Para. 501

MILITARY LAW

(1) COURT MARTIAL

501. Authority to convene a General Court Martial under Section 131 (2) of

the Armed forces Decree No. 105 of 1993 cannot be delegated.

(1) “Contrary to the above however, the General Court Martial in this case was

convened by one Air Commodore F .G. Ajobona who purported to do so on behalf of

the Chief of Air staff. On 6 August 1996, some 14 days after the G.C.M. had been

convened, the Chief of Air Staff wrote a letter as an attachment to the convening

order stating that he had verbally authorized Air Cdr. Ajobona to sign the convening

order. A close perusal of Section 131 of the G.A.F.D., 1993 reveals that it was not the

intendment of the law that the authority to convene a G.C.M. be delegatable. The

authority is vested only in the holders of the stated offices. There was therefore no

power or authority vested in Air Cdr. Ajobona to sign the convening order. The order

was a nullity. The trial and judgment founded on it are nullities: see Okafor v. State

(1976) 5 S.C.; Onwuka v. State (1970) 1 All N.L.R. 159 at 163; Queen v. Owoh

(1962) 1 All N.L.R 659 at 661-662; Awobutu v. State (1976) S.C. 13 49 at 70 and the

unreported judgment of this Court in CA/L/293/98 Wing -Cdr. F.D. Toguloju v. The

State delivered on 22/6/2000.” - Per Oguntade, J.C.A. in Shekete v. N.A.F. Suit No.

CA/L/431/98; (2000) 16 W.R.N. 56 at 69.

(2) “It is not the intendment of S. 131 of the A.F.D. 1993 that the authority to convene

a GCM be delegated as it is done in this case. Only the officers stated above have the

authority to convene a General Court Martial. Clearly the signing of the convening

order by Air commondore Ajobona was null and void. Any trial and judgment based

on this convening order are as well a nullity.” - Per Galadima, J.C.A. in Shekete v.

N.A.F. Suit No. CA/L/431/98; (2000) 16 W.R.N. 56 at 69.

(3) “Now, Section 131(2) of the AFD No. 105 0f 1993 provides: - “2. A General

Court Martial may be convened by (a) The President; or (b) The Chief of Defence

Staff; or (c) The Service Chiefs; of (d) A General Officer Commanding; or Corre-

sponding Commands; or (e) A Brigade Commander or corresponding Commander.

The above provision is clear and explicit. It vests the authority to convene a G.C.M.

on the holders of stated offices. To be able to validly convene a G.C.M. the convener

must occupy one of the offices or act in the office. There was no evidence that Air

Commodore F.O. Ajobena occupied any of the listed offices. There was therefore no

authority in him to sign the convening order.” - Per Oguntade, J.C.A. in Obiosa v.

N.A.F. (2000) 18 W.R.N. 135 at 142; Suit No. CA/L/381/98; (2000) 12 N.W.L.R.

(Pt. 680) 112 at 121.

225