The ECOWAS Court of Justice has ruled that a case brought against the Federal Government of Nigeria over alleged human rights violations concerning the assassination of Kudirat Abiola is inadmissible due to the applicants’ lack of legal standing.
Delivering the judgment on Friday, Justice Edward Amoako Asante stated that the applicants—Khalifa Abiola, Moriam Abiola, and Hadi Abiola—failed to provide sufficient evidence of a direct relationship with the late Kudirat Abiola or any legal authority to represent her estate in court.
Despite dismissing the case, the court rejected the Nigerian government’s argument that it lacked the jurisdiction to hear the matter.
The court clarified that the case fell within its mandate since it involved allegations of human rights violations, specifically Nigeria’s failure to prosecute those responsible for Kudirat Abiola’s assassination.
The applicants, who sued under case number ECW/CCJ/APP/62/22, alleged that Kudirat Abiola was assassinated in June 1996 while leading a campaign for the release of her husband, Chief MKO Abiola.
Chief Abiola, the presumed winner of Nigeria’s June 12, 1993, presidential election, was prevented from assuming office and later imprisoned by the military regime of General Ibrahim Babangida.
They contended that the Nigerian government failed in its duty to ensure justice for Kudirat’s assassination, despite findings from a Commission of Inquiry identifying Sergeant Barnabas Jebila as one of those responsible.
The applicants argued that this failure amounted to a violation of fundamental human rights as outlined in the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
The Nigerian government challenged the case on multiple grounds, including jurisdiction, admissibility, and the claim that the matter had already been settled by a Nigerian court.
The ECOWAS Court, however, ruled that it had jurisdiction since the case involved human rights violations.
It also clarified that it was not acting as an appellate court but rather assessing Nigeria’s compliance with international human rights obligations.
Ultimately, the case was dismissed on procedural grounds, as the applicants lacked the legal authority to sue on behalf of Kudirat Abiola’s estate.
The court ruled that without proper legal standing, the applicants could not pursue the case.
