The Economic Community of West African States, ECOWAS Court of Justice has held a bilateral meeting on the status of enforcement of the Judgments of the community Court.
The Bilateral meeting is aimed at establishing a framework for collaboration, sharing best practices, and addressing challenges in enforcing the Court’s judgments.
The ECOWAS Court given the current enforcement rate of approximately 20%, the bilateral meeting will provide a vital platform to explore innovative approaches that will enhance compliance and uniformity in enforcement procedures.
Speaking at the bilateral meeting, the President of the ECOWAS Court of Justice, Ricardo Monteiro Goncalves, said that “the Revised ECOWAS Treaty (1993), the Protocol relating to the Community Court of Justice as amended by the Supplementary Protocol, the Supplementary Act on sanctions against Member States that fail to fulfil their obligations to ECOWAS, and the Supplementary Act relating to the Community Court of Justice, leave no doubt that the Court’s judgments are binding on Member States, Community institutions, as well as natural and legal persons.’
He said that the decisions of the Court are final and have immediate enforceable effect, and that Member States are required to designate a competent national authority responsible for their enforcement.
Justice Goncalves believed that without enforcement, the decisions of the ECOWAS Court become merely declaratory. ‘Declaratory justice without practical effect does not fulfill its transformative function.”
He said that Nigeria is not merely a Member State, it is one of the founding members of ECOWAS, an economic engine of the region, a political and diplomatic leader, and a pillar of regional stability.
Since the establishment of the Court, 128 cases have been instituted against the Federal Republic of Nigeria; 66 cases have been closed; 10 cases have been executed and 52 cases remain pending execution.
“Nigeria possesses sufficient institutional capacity, democratic maturity and regional influence to assume an exemplary role in the enforcement of the Court’s decisions,” he added.
Justice Goncalves said that Nigeria leads by example, as it strengthens.the authority of the Court; Send a clear message of commitment to the regional rule of law, encourage other States to follow the same path and Consolidate its position as a normative reference in West Africa.
He said that enforcement of its decisions is not a favour to the Court; it is a commitment to the citizens of the region and to the Community project itself.
“I am fully confident that, through the frank and constructive dialogue we begin today, we can transform this challenge into a historic opportunity for institutional strengthening,” he said.
The Nigerian Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, said the ECOWAS Court of Justice has delivered commendable decisions, and criticisms persist.
He said; “Observers point to weak enforcement mechanisms, and a disconnect between supranational judgments and national legal systems. In addition, certain judgments have been described as perverse stretching jurisdiction beyond the Court’s mandate, intruding into sensitive domestic constitutional matters, or imposing unenforceable obligations.
“Whether justified or not, these criticisms highlight the urgent need for clarity in the Court’s role, stronger institutional support, and reforms that balance judicial boldness with respect for sovereignty and enforceability.”
Mr. Fagbemi noted that “the absence of an appellate process in the ECOWAS Court of Justice has a significant impact on how its judgments are perceived and accepted by member states and other stakeholders.
“Because ECOWAS Court judgments are final with no second-tier review, they are susceptible to being viewed as too rigid, especially when they are considered flawed or excessive, or where rulings touch on sensitive political or constitutional issues, or where huge or “excessive” costs are awarded”.
According to him, in litigation or ADR processes, an aggrieved party often prefers systems where judgments or awards can be subject to some form of review.
He said; “The absence of appeal mechanisms can erode trust, as states feel trapped by decisions they cannot contest. By contrast, the European Court of Human Rights has a supervisory mechanism through the Committee of Ministers, the Court of Justice of the European Union has structured appeal and review processes, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has Follow-up procedures, periodic reporting, and compliance hearing, etc.
“ECOWAS Court’s lack of appellate review and follow-up mechanisms stand out as a weakness, making its judgments less acceptable compared to courts with layered supervisory oversight”.
The Minister of Justice said it is clear that the Court of Justice has laid a strong foundation.
He said; “To ensure its judgments carry real weight, we must embrace reforms inspired by successful models elsewhere which include: establishment of regional supervisory oversight to monitor compliance and apply political pressure, introduction of appellate process, introducing compliance hearings and follow-up reporting obligations, adopting more effective enforcement protocols, consideration of cooperation agreements as obtainable with the International Criminal Court.”
Under the ECOWAS Revised Treaty, the 1991 Protocol on the Court, and the Supplementary Protocol of 2005, the judgments of the Community Court of Justice, ECOWAS, are binding on Member States, the ECOWAS institutions, individuals, and corporate bodies.
The effective execution of these judgments is a cornerstone in upholding the rule of law, promoting justice, and safeguarding human rights across the region
