<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel rdf:about="http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/211">
<title>Books</title>
<link>http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/211</link>
<description>Published Books from the department.</description>
<items>
<rdf:Seq>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/2654"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/2546"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/2431"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/2430"/>
</rdf:Seq>
</items>
<dc:date>2026-04-05T22:57:32Z</dc:date>
</channel>
<item rdf:about="http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/2654">
<title>CULTURAL BELIEFS AND THE LAW OF CRIMES IN SOME AFRO- ASIAN COUNTRIES</title>
<link>http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/2654</link>
<description>CULTURAL BELIEFS AND THE LAW OF CRIMES IN SOME AFRO- ASIAN COUNTRIES
MUSA, Sulieman
</description>
<dc:date>2022-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/2546">
<title>LAW AND PRINCIPLES OF CONSUMER PROTECTION</title>
<link>http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/2546</link>
<description>LAW AND PRINCIPLES OF CONSUMER PROTECTION
ANGYA, PAUL
</description>
<dc:date>2013-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/2431">
<title>EFFECTS OF THE NON- ENFORCEMENT OF MORALS ON NATIONAL ORIENTATION</title>
<link>http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/2431</link>
<description>EFFECTS OF THE NON- ENFORCEMENT OF MORALS ON NATIONAL ORIENTATION
DURA, MAGDALYN
The question whether the law should allow or forbid the doing of I&#13;
something which is acknowledged to be unmoral is a controversial one. "&#13;
Two schools of Jurisprudence hold opposing views in this regard. On the&#13;
one hand are the positivists who hold the premise that the law-making&#13;
body does not concern itself with the morality or otherwise of acts or&#13;
conducts and that once a rule of law has filtered through the recognized&#13;
machinery for law-making, it remains law, however bad, unjust or immoral&#13;
it may be.1 Hence, an immoral act may receive general condemnation, but&#13;
unless specifically prohibited by law, it is not illegal simply due to its moral&#13;
condemnation.&#13;
On the other hand, the natural lawyers contend that the validity of&#13;
law is dependent on its moral content, law must therefore enforce morals,&#13;
at both the legislation and interpretation stage to command obedience,&#13;
respect and acceptability and thereby prevent the society from disintegrating.
</description>
<dc:date>2006-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/2430">
<title>An Appraisal of the Right of Representation by Legal Practitioners of One's Choice Under the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria</title>
<link>http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/2430</link>
<description>An Appraisal of the Right of Representation by Legal Practitioners of One's Choice Under the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria
DURA, MAGDALYN
This write-up is under-taken to examine the&#13;
fundamental right of representation by legal&#13;
practitioners of one's choice provided in the&#13;
constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999&#13;
and espoused by other statutes in the Federation. This&#13;
article has therefore, examined the position of the right&#13;
as entrenched in the constitution and other statutes in&#13;
the&gt; country and has examined the judicial&#13;
interpretations in respect of various cases decided by&#13;
the court concerning this right and has revealed how&#13;
the courts by their interpretation has extended the&#13;
contours of this right by taking it to the corridors of bias&#13;
and partiality which is frowned at by the constitution.&#13;
The Supreme Court in attempt to ensure that a litigant&#13;
who is charged with a capital offence and is so poor to&#13;
afford the services of legal practitioner of his choice&#13;
should be assisted by a Judge in presenting the facts of&#13;
his case, has put the court and the Judge in a position to&#13;
unconsciously descend into the arena of the trial thereby&#13;
violating the demand of him to act throughout criminal&#13;
proceedings as unbiased umpire. The state is also&#13;
discovered to have brought itself to be part of the&#13;
‘.election of counsel of one's choice in capital offences&#13;
where an accused per capital income is below N5,000&#13;
per annum and the law enjoined the state in that&#13;
circumstance to assign a legal practitioner to represent&#13;
and assist such an indigent accused in his trial. So this&#13;
right which is intended to be personally enjoyed and&#13;
i" Faculty of Law, Benue State University, Makurdi, Benue State. &#13;
exercised by an accused person at the end of the day, is&#13;
been exercise by an accused person with the assistance&#13;
of the courts and the state in deserving circumstances.&#13;
Introduction&#13;
This paper is principally written to examine and highlight the&#13;
right of representation by a legal practitioner of one's choice&#13;
provided in the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,&#13;
1999 and supported by the provisions of various substantive&#13;
and adjectival laws such as the African Charter on Human&#13;
and Peoples (Ratification and Enforcement) Act,1 the Criminal&#13;
Procedural Code,2 Criminal Procedure Act, 2004, Legal&#13;
Practitioners Act.1 The paper has critically examined and&#13;
reviewed the various provisions of the laws aforementioned&#13;
that have provided for the right of representation by counsel of&#13;
one's choice and has exposed through various cases decided&#13;
by the courts in Nigeria concerning the enforcement and&#13;
protection of this right. It has further exposed how the courts&#13;
in the process of interpretation have stressed the significance&#13;
of this right and extended its principle to allow the court or&#13;
Judges to assist as defence counsel concerning litigants who&#13;
are charged before them for capital offences or serious crimes&#13;
who are so poor that they cannot afford the services of legal&#13;
practitioners of their choice in presenting their defence. It has&#13;
also highlighted that, the suggestion made by the Supreme&#13;
Court above, is a poor substitute in assisting an accused an&#13;
accused person who is charged with serious crimes and is&#13;
assisted to reap the benefit of the right of representation at all&#13;
cost. The suggestion by the supreme court that persons charge&#13;
with capital offences must be assisted by the court in the course&#13;
of their trial has over stretched this constitutional principle to&#13;
the corridors of bias and has impinged on the principle of fan¬&#13;
hearing provided by the constitution which requires that all&#13;
courts and tribunals for the determination of the civil rights
</description>
<dc:date>2007-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>
