William Hagan Amankrah V. The King (1951)
LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction of Supreme Court to hear appeal from Magistrate’s Court forfor offences contra section 8 of Cap. 88—Section 8 included in Part II ofCap. 88, and only applies to such parts of Nigeria as may be ordered by theGovernor-in-Council—Validity of Notice made under section 5 (2) of theNigeria (Protectorate and Cameroons) Order-in-Council, 1946—Distinctionbetween regions and divisions—Whether Proclamation or notice required todivide a region.
Facts
This was an appeal from the Supreme Court, Abbott, J., having granted a certificate that the case was one fit for appeal as an important point of law was involved.
Appellant was convicted of offences contra section 8 of Cap. 88. Section 6 of this same Ordinance provides that section 8 shall only apply to such parts of Nigeria as the Governor-in-Council may order. The offence was committed in Port Harcourt, formerly in the Owerri Province, to which Part II has been applied. At the date of trial by Government Notice No. 126/47, Port Harcourt had been transferred to the Rivers Province to which Part II does not apply.
Abbott, J., held that Government Notice 126/47 was invalid, the transfer having been effected by notice instead of by Proclamation, as required by section 5 (2) of the Nigeria (PrOtectorate and Cameroons) Order-in-Council, 1946. He, accordingly, held that Port Harcourt was still within the Owerri Province and that he had jurisdiction to hear the appeal.
The Attorney-General did not support the conviction contending that a Proclamation was only necessary where boundaries of regions were varied, and that only a notice was required where a region was sub-divided. He asserted that Notice 126/47 effected a sub-division of a region and was therefore valid, and consequently, Port Harcourt was no longer in the Owerri Province but in the Rivers Province, to which Part II did not apply.
Held
Upon a true construction of section 5 (2) of the Nigeria (Protectorate and Cameroons) Order-in-Council it was clear that a Proclamation was only necessary where the boundaries of ” regions ” were varied. In the case of subdivisions of a region a notice sufficed. Legal Notice 126/47 was valid. Port Harcourt was, therefore, in the Rivers Province to which Part II of Cap. 88 did not apply. Accordingly the conviction could not be sustained.
Appeal allowed.
