CONSTITUTIONALITY OF ABRIDGEMENT OF RIGHT OF CROSS-EXAMINATION UNDER THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT OF NIGERIA RULES 2017

Abstract

Right to fair hearing within reasonable time is constitutionally guaranteed under section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended). It is the bed-rock of the Nigeria’s justice system such that its breach vitiates the entire proceedings. True enough, notwithstanding its fundamental nature, the right to fair hearing is not absolute or open ended. Put differently, right to fair hearing does not exist in absolute terms or without limitations in Nigeria. By Order 40 Rule 19 (2) of National Industrial Court of Nigeria (Civil Procedure) Rules, a party cross-examining a witness is not allowed more than forty (40) minutes to do so. Using the extant Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the Evidence Act 2011 and relevant decided cases as the perimeter, this article examined the Constitutionality of limiting the time allowed a party to cross-examine a witness to a maximum of forty (40) minutes under the said Rule. It contended that Order 40 Rule 19 (2) of National Industrial Court of Nigeria (Civil Procedure) Rules 2017 is in conflict with the constitutional guarantee of fair hearing. The Article recommended that trial courts should retain the discretion to determine based on the circumstances and peculiarity of each case, the appropriate time within which cross-examination should be concluded, rather than being bound by a fixed and inflexible time limit.