The Constitutionality Of Seeking The Consent Of The Attorney General Of The Federation Before Enforcement/Garnisheeing The Judgment Of A Court Against Government Agency

The principle of separation of power deals with the division of the powers of governance between the three tiers of government which are the Executive, Judiciary and Legislature. Among the tiers so mentioned, the ”judiciary” is seen as the last hope of common man on earth.

The judiciary gives judgement that are expected to be favourable in the interest of justice. Judgments have their different tones. Judgment can be given for the enforcement of rights, awarding of damages and so on. Interestingly, judgments are also given to enforce the payment of debts. To enforce the judgement of a debt, there are certain laid down procedures to be followed. One of such is the garnishee proceedings which is instituted against a person who is indebted to the judgement debtor in order to attach the debt in satisfaction of the judgement debt.

There is no good reason why a judgment creditor, after the long road embarked upon to get judgment against someone, especially an agency of the government, should be made to succumb him or her to the foot of the Attorney General to seek for consent to enjoy the fruits of his/her labour.
This is despite the fact that the Attorney General is an appointee of the Government.

It is the opinion of the writer that the procedure of subjecting a Judgment Creditor to obtain the consent of the Attorney General contradicts the provision of the Nigerian Constitution.

Section 6 of 1999 Constitution gives power to the judiciary to adjudicate on all matters between persons, or between government or authority and any person in Nigeria.

The act of subjecting the successful litigant to the Attorney General who is an officer under the control of the executive arm of government has brought to knees, the powers of the judiciary. Most specifically, where the Attorney General refuses to grant such consent. This simply makes the Judgment given to be tagged, ”an exercise in futility”.

The court after adjudicating on a right in the spirits of impartiality by giving sound independent judgment in favour of a litigant, expects the same to enforce the judgment by ways of a garnishee proceedings where he knows of another who owes the Judgment Debtor.

Where the judgement debtor is a federal Government agency and the judgement creditor seeks to finalize the process, the same would be made to seek the consent of the Attorney General, who first may or may not exercise his power, especially where the appointee has an interest on the matter. This will lead to the robing of the Court of its power as the final arm of judgment delivery and enforceability. Then, what is a Judgment without the power of the judiciary to completely enforce same?

The principle of natural justice is part of the pillars that support the concept of the rule of law. It is an indispensable part of the process of adjudication in any civilized society.

The Court in Omenka Mathew Ode & Ors. v. Attorney General of Benue State & Ors. (2011) LPELR-CA/J/254/09, critically examined the position of Section 22 of the Commissions of Inquiry Act stating that there is no attempt to ouster the jurisdiction of the Court to hear and determine any matter arising from any act, matter or things done under the Act. They were of the view that the requirement is that civil proceedings must be instituted at instance of the Attorney General. I beg to state emphatically that garnishee proceedings result from an initial suit where a litigant has successfully proven his/her case and judgment has been given, the main issue in garnishee proceedings is that the Judgment Debtor has refused to pay the Judgment sum. The Judgment Creditor has to draw a third party who is in custody of the funds belonging to the Judgment Debtor.

The act of obtaining consent has robbed the court of its highest esteem power of lordship because of the process of subjecting the decisions of the court to the foot of an Attorney General.

It is painful that the only arm that execute the duty of God on earth would need consent to allow its act of adjudication completely enforced as an umpire.

ADEDAYO SAMUEL ADESHEILA, ESQ.