Who Is Above The Law?

By Edikan Ekanem
Click for Full Image Size

There was a mighty king who ruled for decades, he did not respect God neither did he honour men. He lured many people into idolatry, doomed their spirituality and tortured those who did not listen to him. He raised a golden image and commanded many to bow for the golden image but something terrible happened that shaken his faith and made him recognised the existence of a higher being when he said: “Praised be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who sent his angel and rescued his servants.

They trusted in him and went against the command of the king and were willing to die rather than serve or worship any god except their own God. I am therefore issuing an order that any people, nation, or language group that says anything against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego should be dismembered, and their houses should be turned into public latrines; for there is no other god who is able to rescue like this one”. His name was Nebuchadnezzar, who later recognised the existence of his creator.

Ordinarily, the above king would not have uttered such words because he taught he is above the law, as long as he was involved, no one can bring him accountable for his actions. In today’s world, we have people that think in a similar way that they are superior to everyone and the law on the planet earth and no one will question them for their deeds neither will their actions be sanctioned nor queried.

This is indeed not conclusive, rather it is a rebuttable presumption that can be upturned any point in time. In ascertaining the veracity this rebuttable presumption, analysis of certain people in the world in the world who had such mentality may be brought into play and the thrust of this discussion will be brought out by examining their flaws as the had the same mentality that did not last long.

First and foremost, it is important to point out that the law in this context that we are about discussing has a general applicability and it is amorphous in shape. It will touch ecclesiastical laws and natural laws, then most importantly constitutional law. Seeking to expound to expound on these laws will help us see the limitations human abilities which will invariably help us in answering the topic question for clarity in this discussion.

There are some people who think they cannot be subjected to law because their status in life or the political office that they are holding. Well such thinking is best interpreted by them as a prima facie statement. To think about, who among these people knew about his existence before coming into the world? Who among them knew himself as foetus? Who among them do not take medication anytime they fall sick? Going further than that, who among them can eschew himself from sickness? Who among them can be like an island without any help from his counterpart? Who can determine life span of his existence on the planet earth? Who can add a cubit to his lifespan? If no man can do any of the above, what makes us think that we are above the law? Or are these not laws to our existence?

Looking back to ourselves, who among us can take exclusive control of himself? Who among us can take his thinking ability beyond what is designed? How many among the natural laws of our body can be exterminated or construed?

It is hypocritical to think that we are above the law when we cannot ordinarily limit the laws within ourselves.

Let imagine, who among the potentates, the elites, who among the top politicians can control their reflex actions? Who among us can stop yawning or sneezing when it comes? Who can resist when nature calls like sleep? Or do we not classify this into law? Or is there any among us who is above this law? These are just mere thinking to let us appreciate the answer that is yet to be given below in connection to the above posed question. For the purpose of this discussion, we will examine some principles of law that would help us see the extent that laws is elevated above us.

The issue of equality before the law is embedded on the principle of rule of law and that’s where our discussion will be centred. The doctrine of rule of law means a country being governed by civil laws or regular laws, these laws which are reasonably justifiable in a democratic society, as opposed to draconian, oppressive and arbitrary laws or arbitrary exercise of government powers. As a doctrine, it means the observance and supremacy of civil laws, the absence of arbitrariness as opposed to force, despotism, dictatorship, tyranny and ultimately anarchy and chaos.

As a concept, it has many principles that would make us appreciate the subject matter of the discussion more as stated accordingly: The supremacy of the law, equality of the law, action according to law, respect for the decision of the court and government according to law. As a matter of focus, the material particular of this conundrum lies on the first two principles which form the centre piece of this discussion.

Supremacy of the law
Supremacy of the law is a fundamental concept in the western democratic order. The rule of law requires both citizens and governments to be subject to known and standing laws. The supremacy of law also requires generality in the law. This principle is a further development of the principle of equality before the law. Laws should not be made in respect of particular persons. As Dicey postulated, the rule of law presupposes the absence of wide discretionary authority in the rulers, so that they cannot make their own laws but must govern according to the established laws. Those laws ought not to be too easily changeable. Stable laws are a prerequisite of the certainty and confidence which form an essential part of individual freedom and security. Therefore, laws ought to be rooted in moral principles, which cannot be achieved if they are framed in too detailed a manner.

Under the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, government and all persons are all under and subject to the rule of law. Section 1 (1) of the constitution states: “this constitution is supreme and its provisions shall have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout the federal republic of Nigeria”.

From the forgoing, who will we say is above the law? No one, as long as the Nigerian constitution is supreme therefore meaning that all of us are subject to the law. As posited by John Locke (1632-1704): “ freedom of men under government is to have a standing rule to live by, common to everyone of that society and made by the legislative power created in it, and not to be subject to inconstant, unknown arbitrary will for another man” . It therefore means that no one is above the law.

Equality before the law
In this context, the rule of law means equality of citizens before the law, and not favouritism. All persons in the society should be equal and subject to the law of the land. The law should apply equally to the rulers and the people (the governors and the governed) except for the privileges permitted by the Constitution or other laws, for certain public officers during their term of office and so forth. Example of such privilege is judicial immunity and diplomatic immunity. Another of such example is seen under section 308 of the constitution which deals with the limitations to suits that can be brought against the governors, president, vice and deputy governors. It should be noted that this immunity is not perpetual but for a fixed period.

In the case of Gouriet v Uniom of Post Office Workers (1977) 1 QB729 at 761-762, lord Denning MR stating the position of the law on equality said: “ to every subject in thus land, no matter how powerful, I would use Thomas Fuller’s words over 300 years ago : ‘Be you never so high, the law is above you’”

Having seen that, we can affirmatively state that the civil law of the land is the yardstick for our performance and actions not withstanding our financial, political and educational standard in the society. Since we have the laws in our society, is it not good we all conform to the provisions of these laws so that we can maintain peace and order in the society without anarchy?

May I conclude by saying that if we all abide with the natural laws and our own made laws (enactments), not violating them and taking it into our hands rather subjecting ourselves the provisions of the law, it is then that we would have the real democratic State as was defined by the Supreme Court in the case of Speicer v Randall as: “Free society in which government is based upon the consent of an informed citizenry and is dedicated to the protection of the right of all, even the most despised minorities”.

Edikan Ekanem is a student of university of Uyo and a columnist and can be reached at: 08130015006, [email protected]

Disclaimer: "The views expressed on this site are those of the contributors or columnists, and do not necessarily reflect TheNigerianVoice’s position. TheNigerianVoice will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements in the contributions or columns here."