Do Law Graduates of National Open University of Nigeria (NOUN) Get Admitted Into Nigerian Law School?

As things stand currently, the CLE will not permit NOUN law graduates to be admitted to its law school – that is the fact as of today.

I am familiar with NOUN and I know, for a fact, that it has a law faculty (called the School of Law). It has a flourishing moot court system – they have even won some competitions. It runs all the required courses and content is same as other Nigerian universities.

Why will the CLE not not admit their graduates to its law schools (for now) then? The CLE is yet to tell us. (After all, the CLE is not expected to simply refuse to admit their graduates – it is expected to give them certain conditions they must meet.) Listening to them and Mr Lateef, what you can distill is the age old elitism at work – the desire to restrict the profession to a few.

Maybe there’s nothing wrong with that, but things should be done fairly. Every prospective enrolee of the NOUN school of law enquires as to the status of law school admission and they are assured that they would be admitted to the law school after their LLB studies. They then enrol and pay all the fees. This appears to be another government 419 in the country of anything-goes, then!

The Federal Government of Nigeria – the principal of the CLE and the NOUN – can resolve this. But I doubt they care. The NOUN people are glad to be making money from hapless Nigerians who want to become lawyers.

That is the situation for now. Things can change tomorrow – after all, this problem has occurred and been resolved in some other countries.

Meanwhile, maybe Mr Lateef can come back and tell us the law and facts that stop the CLE from admitting NOUN graduates to its law school – he forgot to do so in his last intervention.

I kown that the court will have a final say in this matter. I wounder what those who have graduated and the current noun law students are waiting. I know many SAN that are interested in this matter and are ready to address it at the appopriate quarters.The right time is now.

I,Thelma, I’m a bonafide student of NOUN & I know that the ministry is moving forward. We the students are trying are possible best to resolve this issue. We’ve held so many moot court inter chamber competitions & even the international competitions we’ve attended, we’ve never failed. If I may ask, I’d love to ask d CLE & my counsels: has there been any criminal record of NOUN or any failures? Pls, I hate those who critisize & don’t bring solutions. Pls, I urge d CLE to resolve this issue in our(NOUN) favour. God bless.

Now i don’t have a clear understanding of this Noun university, are you guys telling me that Noun graduates cant gain employment in any field

2015/2016 Admission into the AUCHI POLLYTECHNIC is open to all qualified candidates

irrespective of religion, ethnic group, gender or political inclination.Admission into the

University will be only through either the University Matriculation Examination (UTME) or

Direct Entry of the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB).In order to be eligible

for admission into the AUCHI POLLYTECHNIC, all prospective students are expected to satisfy

the following general requirements:
For admission through 100 level (UTME), candidates must:
* Possess five (5) credits at SSCE equivalent in relevant subjects at not more than 2

sittings;contact for more information contact 07052361447
auchipollyorg22@gmail.com
Candidates may be required to pass an internal screening test/interview in addition to passing

the UTME

Admin, all what you mentioned above are false. It goes to show you know nothing about NOUN. NOUN participated in the 2013 moot court competition for the very first time and we beat all other conventional Universities in Nigeria hands down. We came out the best. Please make your inquiry about NOUN before commenting

@ misbau mislaw lateef. With due respect sir, your position runs free and foul of the language and content of the parent instrument that establishes The CLE. If u think otherwise, we may need some statutory citations.

1. Unfairness Of The Policy Of The C.L.E. And The Doctrine of Natural Justice
The prohibition of the law graduates of The National Open University of Nigeria (NOUN), from entrance to The Nigerian Law School, on the premise that the study of Law transcends knowledge acquisition alone, but involve the moulding of future entrants to the bar, without due course of test and screening, tailored, towards individual capacities, merits, and circumstances, is tantamount to the none observance of “audi alterum partem”.
In this circumstance, it is a matter of condemnation without been heard. It is a breach of natural justice to condemn a person without been heard. The natural justice principle of “audi alterum partem” must be limited to ordinary hearing but expanded to encompass all matters and circumstances bordering on decisions and policies making, when the said decisions or policies could have been otherwise, if the affected parties are allowed to be heard, tried or tested as each circumstance may demand.
This can only be done if the policy of the council accord every recipient of the said policy a leveled – playing ground, to demonstrate their abilities in the issues the policy makers appeared to regard as important, particularly where competence, credibility, trust and veracity are at issue.
Fair hearing in this circumstance implies that every Nigerian aspirant for the legal Profession is allowed to present a personality with a demonstrable ability in the general knowledge of law and its application, fundamental skills, competence in the application of legal logic in criminal justice and civil processes, analyses of legal problem and the effective conduct of legal researches all within the realm of professionalism.
“The common law rule that the statutory authority having the powers to affects the rights and obligations of a person is bound to hear such person before exercising its powers is both fundamental and universal” Ese Malemi Esq, Administrative Law, 4th Edition, 2013, Princeton Publishing Company.
To this end, social and natural justice would be best done, if opportunities are opened for all qualified law graduates of The National Open University of Nigeria, to be examined and screened by the regulatory bodies through a justifiable standard of fair dealing. Otherwise, the Prohibitory policy of the Council would derail from the public standard of Even-Handed Justice, naturally required of the regulatory bodies to extent to all aspirants Nigerians for the legal profession.
The decision of the Council has always been founded of the premise that, every aspirant for the legal profession must undertake an undergraduate study of law on full time basis, in faculties of law only recognized by the Council; stressing that the study of law transcends knowledge acquisition alone, as it involves the molding of future entrants to the Bar in learning, character and attitude.
But whether a lawyer is molded in learning, character and attitude is to me, not justifiable by the institution where the lawyer was educated, but the education itself, the lawyer’s individual receptive tendency and the his personal propensity to adapt.
The policy of the Council illustrates a scenario where persons called to compete in a race must have to be given birth to in a particular hospital or trained by a particular instructor whom the Managers of the race competition considers to be fit for such purpose; which supposition is based on the belief that the hospital must have been well equipped by medical experts and facilities, at least to ensure that the child at birth is safely delivered against any possible form of deformity.
But here comes some other children, strong and endowed with the individual demonstrable ability to compete and possibly win in the race. Perhaps these children came out of birth sound, with no deformities. But it is unfortunate that their births took place in the manger, a home or possibly on a street due to prevailing societal setting.
The questions now should be:
Should these children be allowed to compete at all, or summarily disqualified from competing?
Justice demands that the children be allowed to compete, or at least checked if they could favorably compete, otherwise it may seem to be a departure from the standard of even-handed justice “naturally” required of the relative regulatory body to extend to all aspirants for that race. In other words an act which lacks good faith
Dissenting from position of the council, this thesis maintains that it is not only irrational but also unfounded to suppose that the selection of worthy lawyers should be based on institutional style qualifications, rather than individual capacities and merit

2.The Exercise Of Discretion in Decision and Rule Making Vs. Judicial Review:
It is a peremptory rule of administrative law that the exercise of administrative discretion by administrative or regulatory agency is not whimsical, capricious or arbitrary but strictly and strongly subject to the rules of fairness.
It should be further pointed out that discretion is the power to act according to good conscience, sound judgment, unbiased interest, prevailing facts and relevant consideration, not an implementation of hard-and-fast rule. I.e. a regulatory or administrative body exercising discretionary power must take responsibility in carefully considering the prejudicial effect of the exercise of such power on the recipients of its policy.
Where the administrative authority is vested with the discretion to what choice of procedure to use in dealing with a problem, such discretion should be exercise s fairly, reasonably, according to law and more predominantly in concord with the spirit of the instrument creating the administrative authority and its powers. It would amount to a misconstruction to presume that the legislative intent of the Council of Legal Education (Consolidation etc) Act is to empower the council to empower the Council with the authority to refuse admission of aspiring lawyers to Nigerian Law School; neither is it conceivable that the Act intends to regulate the study of law at the University Academic level of LLB.
The sections 1(2) and 5 of the Council of Legal Education (Consolidation, etc) Act, vests a discretionary power on the council of legal education for the admission and training of persons aspiring for the legal profession in Nigeria.
The power vested by the instrument, as mentioned above is a discretionary power as the instrument appears to be dormant about how and by what criteria or procedure the regulatory body is to admit aspirants lawyers to the Nigerian law school and subsequently calls them to the bar.
Though, discretionary acts are not ultra virus, as a matter of general principle. However, where a discretion is exercised unfairly, unreasonably, improperly, arbitrarily, in contravention of the legislative intent of the enabling instrument, or so forth, then such act is administratively review-able or further, judicially review-able

For a discretionary power does not presuppose the indulgence of administrative whims, but the exercise of discretionary power, guided by the spirit of law and equity as to what is just and proper under a particular circumstance.
From the foregoing, it is charged that where ….something is left to be done according to the discretion of the authority or person on whom the power of doing so is conferred, the discretion must be exercised honestly, in good faith and in the spirit of the enabling instrument, otherwise the act done will not fall within the said instrument and thus ultra vires
In the spirit of section 1 (2) and section 5, Council of Legal Education (consolidation, etc) Act, which vest the discretionary power on the regulatory body, Council of Legal Education, for the legal education of persons seeking to become members of the legal profession, It may be charged that the legislative intent of the Act is to lodge with the regulatory body, the trust and duty, not to allow some spineless, privileged puppet into the Bar, but to ensure constant flow of seasoned lawyers worthy to stand before judges and preach their understanding and the need to uphold the law and its instrumentalities.
It will appear monstrous to our constitutional democracy to presume that the legislative intent of the relevant instrument is to disqualify such a large segment of Nigerians from coming into the Bar.
Now, is it not a dangerous precedent for the regulatory body to tailor its screening policy to institutional style qualification, rather than individual demonstrable capacities and merits?
The study of law in the university is a means to an end, not an end to a means. The University is an institution and I believe our difficulty in having unbaked lawyers in the Bar is less, a matter of institution than the people therein plus their individual receptive tendencies.
Some Judicial Authorities will do justice here.

Padfield V Minister Of Agriculture;
In this case the Minister had a subjectively-worded power (i.e. a discretionary power) to order an investigation into complaint concerning the administration of Milk Marketing Scheme. The Minister refused Mr. Padfield’s complaint in respect of the scheme to a committee of enquiry and Mr. Padfield brought an action against him for the refusal to do so. On appeal, the House of Lords by a majority held: that in not ordering an inquiry the minister was frustrating the aims and object of the parent Instrument, The Agricultural Marketing Act. 1958. Though the Minister could have been given widely drafted powers, but these were not to be used to thwart the policy (intent) behind the legislation.
The matter would therefore be remitted to the Queen’s Bench Division with a direction compelling the Minister to consider the plaintiff appellant’s complaint according to law for the following reasons:
Where a statute conferring a discretion on a Body, Minister of Agency to exercise or not to exercise a power did not expressly limit or define the extent of his discretion, specify the choice of procedure in dealing with a problem, and did not require him to decline and give reasons for declining to exercise the power, his discretion might nevertheless be limited to the extent it must not be so used, as to frustrate the very object (intent) of the instrument conferring such discretion.
In the words of the Learned Counsel, Ese Malemi, “Discretion is the better part of valour, and the officer exercising the discretion is expected to be sober, objective, dispassionate and careful in his judgement and avoid unnecessary action or inaction”.
Going by the tones and tenure of the council of legal education act, the power vested on the CLE to admit LLB holding aspirants to the Nigerian Law School for their vocational training, alongside the inherent powers for the administration of law school is of discretionary nature. This thesis offers no contention against the competence of the Council to exercise administrative discretion in the admission and training of aspiring lawyers at the Nigerian Law School (Vocational level) as the thesis is of the submission that where power is discretionary and the discretion has been exercised by the relevant authority in a particular way, the court should be reluctant when called upon to intervene especially in the event of a call grant an order of mandamus to compel the exercise of the discretion in the opposite direction as prayed by the applicant – a position justified by the principle that discretionary power is generally not ultra vires and a discretion strictly so called should be allowed to manifest the spirit of discretion; However, it is a fundamental principle of Administrative law that discretion must be exercised not arbitrarily or based on irrelevant consideration but strictly in the spirit and intent of the instrument conferring the discretion, anything short of which amounts to irregularity, inconsistency and illegality calling for Judicial review of the exercise of such discretion, hence a court order issued against it.

3.Where A Condition Precedent is Fulfilled, Discretion is Usually Exercise as a matter of Duty.
As a matter of general rule of law, where the recipients discretionary actions and policies has satisfied and fulfilled the condition precedent prescribed by a valid law for the exercise of discretion, there is a legal duty upon the done on the power to exercise the discretion is predicted in favor of the applicant recipient. The above imports to concepts namely
1. where a discretion is predicated on the satisfaction or fulfillment of a condition precedent validated by law beneficiary of the discretion may only be refused, where the condition precedent has not been satisfied or fulfilled or there are other vitiating circumstances
2. where such condition is prescribed by a valid law, the satisfaction of such condition is to be tested against the criteria of confirmed by the law, not the discretion of the administrative agencies
In this present case, the condition precedent for admission to Nigerian law school is the completion of LLB is at the university academic in national universities commission through its section various functions which involves laying down minimum academic standards in the federal republic of Nigeria and to accredit their and others academic awards and ammes of the Nigeria university system.
The satisfaction of such condition precedent is not a matter to be fixed by the administrative policy of the council education, but to be fixed by a test of conformity by the policy and approved of N U C.
Once the issue o f satisfaction and fulfillment of the condition of the condition precedent has been fixed to affirmative, there will be no further ground for the council of legal education to refuse the exercise of its function in admitting the beneficiaries to the Nigerian Law School for the exercise of such power becomes a duty and (not just a discretion) upon the Council of Legal Education the performance of which may be compelled by a court order- Mandamus.
It is arguable that the conferment of power or authority means and implied duty to exercise such power and the neglect, omission or refusal to exercise the power which results in injury to an aggrieved beneficiary is contrary to the intendment or spirit of the enabling statute in which instance, an order of mandamus will lie to compel the relevant authority or body to exercise the power or perform the public duty which has been neglected. This is the rule of law in Banjo V Abeokuta Urban District Council where it was held inter alia that “if a body against whom an order of mandamus is sought departs from the conditions laid down in the law, empowering the body to perform its public duty, an order of mandamus will lie against it to do its duty.

It should be pointed out and pointed clearly that, given the tones and tenor of the Council of Legal Education Act with respect to the admission and practical training of aspirant Lawyers in The Nigerian Law School, is a call for duty which must be performed in favour of the holders of LLB degree from Nigerian Universities and that of other common law countries as the case may be.
It follows therefore that the council of legal education and the Nigerian Law School is statutorily saddled with duty of ensuring the admission and training of aspirant lawyers suitably qualified for such admission and training by reason of their meritorious completion of LLB Studies at the University Academic Legal; which LLB must, as a matter of law, be satisfied and approved by the NUC.
No more than this can be done to preserve the doctrine of clear separation of powers among federal administrative bodies.
It is not in any way contentious, that powers and functions for the council include to formulate and carry out policies, with respect to legal expectation of aspirant lawyers. However it should be appreciated that the legal education of the aspirant lawyers as in stages ranging from the collection of art and humanity subjects that must be studied and passed at the secondary school (stage one) on the study of law at the university academic levels covering the 12 core course alongside some activities (stage two) to the practical training to be taking a the law school covering such areas as criminal litigations, civil litigation, corporate law practice, property law and Law and Practice (ethics) which is the third and final stage, with each of the stages being regulated by statutory bodies deriving their powers and functions from the respective enabling instrument.
Given the terms and tenor of the (CLE) enabling instrument, IT IS ARGUABLE that the powers and functions of the Council does not necessarily include and extend to accreditation or otherwise and regulation of the study of law at the university academic level. And if the council claims to have such powers, it should necessarily follow that such powers is only derivable from the statute (either express, implied or incidental) creating the Council
The powers exercise by a statutory body is express power (as expressly provided by the statute), incidental power (as may be necessary for the exercise of the express power) or incidental (which may be rightly or wrongly presumed or imagined to exist)
The enabling instrument obviously does not confer express powers on the council to accredit or regulate the study of law at the University academic level and as a matter of logical necessity, there cannot be incidental power where there is no express power as the incidental power is only needed for the exercise of express powers. Again Power cannot be implied or presumed to exist which does not support the provision or spirit of a mother instrument. Every incidental or implied power should necessarily find its validity in the relative express powers.
The position of the Council could have been justified as exercising implied or incidental powers if the council deems it necessary to set an individual merit-based standard for screening and entry to the Nigerian Law School just as it is done at Nigerian University entry level through the instrumentality of the UTME and University Post UTME.
Though there is no doubt that the Council in consultation with the NUC may in the spirit administrative federalism, set and review curriculum for law faculties in Nigeria, but stretching its regulatory tentacles to the accreditation and approval of law faculties in Nigerian universities, when a valid federal Law (The NUC Act) has been enacted, creating the NUC and vesting same with powers of accreditation, is not only a gross abuse of the doctrine of separation of powers among administrative agencies, but also non-procedural and arbitrary exercise of administrative power in abuse of the rule of law.