The paper identifies the challenges posed by the emergence of digital currency which has a latent potential of concealing corruption. Relying on the theories of legal consciousness the paper examines the preparedness of the judiciary in this new normal in handling and hearing cases of corruption, money laundering and examining the right to hold property of an individual-in this instance digital properties.
The rights of persons with disability is one that requires deconstruction and reconstruction of several institutional and theoretical frameworks. This paper would thus theoretical examine the need to ensure that the normative framework in place for the protection, promotion and fulfilment of rights of persons with hearing impairment are protected. It would examine the role the court can play in ensuring this.
The paper identifies that the right to development is one that is still begging for answers. Considering questions such as what the role the courts can play in ensuring the realisation of RTD, the paper examines the role of the African Court towards setting jurisprudence that would be a bench mark of several other regional initiatives.
The violence erupting because of the activities of bandits and terrorists in Nigeria and surrounding countries suggest the need to ensure an ethical preparedness of all institutions that could get involved in handling migrant challenges. To this end this paper would analyze from an ethical paradigm issues surrounding justice delivery.
The paper sets out to resolve the age long challenge of the concept of separation of powers in state relations. It examines the recent developments in judiciary strikes in Nigeria which is hinged on agitations for indolence of the judiciary. The paper would examine to what extent the judiciary would attempt to resolve more economic rights issues if it is perceived to be independent.
Since the advent of democratic governance in Nigeria in 1999 as a debut of the fourth republic in Nigeria, the Judiciary has played considerably very important roles in the determination of the Governors at the State level and the President at the Federal level. In the discharge of this constitutional responsibility, the judex has become a joke and distrust and from the jurisprudential point of view, this distrust is easily situated within the contextual imputations of the concept of justice which is determined by the slants, prejudice and bias of those involved in litigation. The paper will further interrogate whether the judiciary in the understanding of political questions doctrine in a position to dabble into issues of election.