A Lagos High Court has barred local
government areas from issuing forthwith, marriage certificate, saying it
is unlawful and unconstitutional.
Justice I.O. Harrison said in her
judgement delivered on May 15, 2017, a certified true copy of which
THISDAY obtained at the weekend, that the issuance of modified or
customised marriage certificate by local government areas contravened
Section 24 of the Marriage Act and Item 6, Part 1, 2nd Schedule of the
1999 Constitution as amended, which lists marriage on the Exclusive
Legislative List.
She further ruled that marriage being an
Exclusive List item, was under the purview of the federal government,
which is regulated by the Federal Ministry of Internal Affairs.
The judge, however, declined to nullify
all marriages conducted so far by local government areas, directing that
such certificates be surrendered and be replaced by fresh ones that
would be issued in compliance with the law.
A Lagos lawyer, Olumide Babalola, had on
September 29, 2016 filed a class action against Ikeja Local Government
Area and Registered Trustees of Association of Local Government of
Nigeria (ALGON), challenging the power of the local government areas to
issue modified and/ or customised marriage certificates different from
the one provided in Form E under Section 24 of the Marriage Act LFN
1990.
He sought four reliefs: “A declaration
that the 1st and 2nd defendants do not have power to issue modified and/
or customised marriage certificates different from the one provided in
Form E under Section 24 of the Marriage Act LFN 1990;
“A declaration that the 2nd defendant’s
Local Government Unified Marriage Certificate is unknown to our law,
unconstitutional, null and void;
“A perpetual injunction restraining the
defendants, their agents, officers, employees and representatives from
further issuing modified and/ or altered marriage certificates apart
from the form as provided under Form E (1st Schedule) and Section 24 of
the Marriage Act, LFN 1990; and
“A perpetual injunction restraining the
2nd defendant, their agents, officers, employees and representatives
from further issuing ‘Local Government Unified Marriage Certificates.”
Babalola supported his application with a 29 paragraph affidavit, three exhibits and a written address.
In spite of service of summons, the
defendants neither filed any process nor appeared in court to defend the
suit. The court was, therefore, moved on March 24, 2017 with the
claimant appearing in person and arguing his case.
He argued that marriage was on the
Exclusive Legislative List and that the Marriage Act enjoined that all
marriage certificates were to be in Form E of the 1st Schedule of the
Marriage Act LFN, 1990.
He claimed that the 2nd defendant and
its branches now issue their own form known as the Local Government
Unified Marriage Certificate, which was also issued to him.
Babalola prayed the court to declare the
local government areas’ action illegal, unconstitutional, null and void
and grant all the reliefs he sought.
Harrison agreed with Babalola and
granted the four reliefs, effectively shutting out local government
areas from further issuance of the unified marriage certificates and
restricted them to only registration of marriages.
“It should be noted that while
registration of marriages is regulated by local government being under
the Concurrent List, formation of marriage is under the Exclusive
Legislative List within the domain of the federal government regulated
by the Federal Ministry of Internal Affairs – item 6 of 2nd Schedule of
1999 Constitution,” she said, explaining that: “A marriage had been
declared invalid by the Supreme Court on the ground that the marriage
certificate was not in line with Form E as provided by the Marriage
Act.”
Harrison said following the Supreme
Court decision in Anyaegbunam Vs Anyaegbunam, 1973 3 ECSLR 243, it was
trite that the local and state governments could not make separate
arrangements outside that provided for in the Marriage Act Form E.
Reacting to the judgement, the Director
of Press, Ministry of Interior, Mr. Willie Bassey, said it was a welcome
development, urging local government areas to comply forthwith.
“The judgement is in conformity with the
law and the Constitution and we expect the local government areas to
comply with it immediately,” he said, adding that the ministry would
soon role out an enforcement strategy.
No comments: