The 20th of October, 2021, marked the first anniversary of the #ENDSARS protest. What was done to the victims of the protest in this period.

Following the #ENDSARS protests that rocked most parts of Nigeria in 2020, which was against human rights violations by the dissolved Special Anti-Robbery Squad and other police units, the National Economic Council directed states to set up judicial panels of inquiry to investigate the complaints, with a view to delivering justice for all victims of police brutality.

The reports were to be submitted to the Federal Government that gave the directive to states and the recommendations therein to be effected by the Federal Government including payment of compensation.


One of the duties of the panel is to pay compensation to any victim who may have suffered any harm. Reportedly, Lagos state has, so far, paid out over N400 Million in compensation to the victims.

The above begs for the following answers. Do states have the power to set up these panels of inquiry? Do the panels have the power to award compensation to the victims? Are there conflicts between the powers of these panels of inquiry and the regular court?

The setting up of panels of inquiry are not items on the exclusive or concurrent list as contained in the constitution. The setting up of the panels of inquiry is residual matter within the exclusive legislative competence of state governments which is covered by the various Tribunal of Inquiry Laws of different states which is an existing law saved by section 315 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (CFRN).

In WILLIAMS V DAWODU (1988) 4 NWLR 189 CA, the court held that the provisions of the Tribunal of Inquiry Laws of Lagos State promulgated on 4th December, 1968 qualifies as an existing law under section 274 of the 1979 Constitution which is in pari material with section 315 of the 1999 CFRN as amended.


However, while the Tribunal of Inquiry law may be saved by section 6 (6) (d) of the constitution, by the provisions of Section 315 (3) of the 1999 CFRN, the powers of the court to declare invalid any provision of an existing law or the constitution is unaffected by the provisions of section 6 (6) (d).

What the above presupposes is that despite the powers of the Tribunals of Inquiry, they are still subject to the overriding powers of the courts. In WILLIAMS V DAWODU (SUPRA), the court went further to hold that by virtue of the provisions of Section 14 (2) of the Tribunal of Inquiry Law of Lagos State which purports to upgrade the recommendation or decision of a tribunal of inquiry to that of a High Court Judge, it is contrary to the judicial powers vested in the courts by section 6 of the CFRN.

Worthy of note also is that a Tribunal of Inquiry is limited to the terms of reference. Hence, nothing can be done by them outside the scope of what they have been mandated to do. Therefore, where from the terms of reference, it is obvious that the recommendation of a tribunal of inquiry set up by the government is bound to affect one way or another, a civil action instituted by a citizen, that citizen has sufficient interest to initiate an action questioning the constitutionality of the Tribunal. WILLIAMS V DAWODU (SUPRA).

As most Tribunals of Inquiry set up by various states of the federation begin to wrap up their assignment, it is pertinent that at the end of the day, they act within their scope of authority, so that their recommendations will not fall outside the ambit of their powers. The Tribunals should also not do any act which will usurp the powers of the courts. The victims of the #EndSars protest must be seen to be adequately compensated in line with the provisions of the law.

Davidson Duru Esq.

https://legalspectacle.com/tribunals-of-inquiry-jurisdiction-powers-and-limitations/