A recent decision by the Court of Appeal limiting the investigative authority of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) over oil pollution complaints has stirred sharp criticism from human rights advocates.
The Centre for Human Rights Advocacy and Wholesome Society (CEHRAWS) issued a formal position paper challenging the judgment, arguing that it misrepresents the link between environmental degradation and fundamental human rights. According to CEHRAWS, the ruling risks silencing one of the most accessible avenues for justice available to oil-affected communities, particularly those in Nigeria’s Niger Delta region.
CEHRAWS referenced key constitutional provisions—including the right to life, dignity, and health—while citing regional case law such as SERAP v. FRN and Gbemre v. Shell, which affirm environmental harm as a rights violation. The organization also criticized the judiciary’s reliance on past precedents, such as Opara v. SPDC, saying they contradict the enforceable standards of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
Justice Abang’s declaration that the NHRC’s activities amounted to a “violent usurpation” of judicial powers was met with strong opposition. CEHRAWS stressed that the Commission’s panels are administrative, not judicial, and function as fact-finding bodies empowered by the NHRC Act of 2010.
The organization called for a five-pronged response:
- An appeal to the Supreme Court
- Legislative amendments to the NHRC Act
- A clarifying statement from the Attorney General
- Enhanced training for judges on environmental rights jurisprudence
- Notification of treaty-monitoring bodies and international development partners
The judgment, CEHRAWS warns, sets a dangerous precedent that threatens to undermine Nigeria’s domestic and international human rights obligations.
