ECOWAS Court Accepts Jurisdiction in Delta Death Row Prisoner's $50M Nigeria Suit

The Community Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS Court) has announced its competence to hear a human rights complaint lodged against the Federal Republic of Nigeria by Mr. Orikri Rhahor, an inmate on death row from Delta State.

According to the Certified True Copy of the ruling, officially disseminated by the Registry of the ECOWAS Court on June 17, 2026, the Court had previously delivered its judgment virtually on May 18, 2026, in Suit No. ECW/CCJ/APP/34/25. In its decision, the regional judicial body rejected Nigeria's preliminary objection that questioned the Court's authority, confirming that the application was admissible for a full determination on its merits.

Mr. Rhahor, a Nigerian citizen currently incarcerated at the Warri Medium Security Custodial Centre in Delta State, initiated the legal action through his counsel, Andrew Elekeokwuri Esq. His suit before the ECOWAS Court alleges breaches of his fundamental human rights, which he claims arose during his criminal proceedings at the Delta State High Court. The application details that he was convicted and sentenced to death by hanging on July 10, 2024, in Criminal Case No. EHC/35C/2020 by Justice Michael Nduka Obi of the High Court of Delta State, Effurun Judicial Division.

The applicant maintains that his conviction and death sentence constitute violations of his rights to a fair hearing, personal liberty, human dignity, and protection from inhuman and degrading treatment. He further contended that the trial court primarily relied on unchallenged prosecution evidence and failed to adequately assess his defence before reaching its verdict.

Court records indicate that the originating application was filed on July 17, 2025. Subsequently, the Federal Republic of Nigeria submitted its defence along with a preliminary objection, disputing the ECOWAS Court's power to entertain the matter. The respondent argued that the case originated from domestic criminal proceedings and that the ECOWAS Court functions neither as an appellate court nor possesses criminal jurisdiction.

However, the ECOWAS Court reiterated its established legal position, confirming its jurisdiction to hear cases alleging human rights violations, irrespective of whether these alleged violations stem from decisions made by national courts. The Court clarified that while it does not serve as an appellate body over domestic courts, it retains the mandate to examine whether actions or decisions by national authorities, including judicial rulings, result in infringements of internationally protected human rights.

Justice Ricardo Cláudio Monteiro Gonçalves presided over the three-member panel, which concluded that the applicant's claims were fundamentally based on allegations of human rights violations safeguarded under the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and other international instruments binding on Nigeria. The Court further affirmed that the requirements for invoking its human rights jurisdiction under Article 9(4) of the Supplementary Protocol had been satisfied, and the application was not clearly inadmissible.

Consequently, the Court declared that it has the jurisdiction to review the application and formally admitted the case for a substantive hearing. “In the instant case, since the Applicant has identified himself as a victim of a human rights violation, and there is no evidence that the same case has been heard before another competent international court, the Court finds that the application is not manifestly inadmissible under Article 10(4) of the Supplementary Act A/SA.1/12/25 on the court, cited above, nor for nay other ground. The action must therefore be declared admissible,” the ruling stated.

On the matter of jurisdiction, the court asserted its authority to hear the case, declaring its competence “to examine the application” and ruling the application as “admissible.” It further stipulated that “subject to the Rules of the Court, the application will be considered on the merits,” adding that “The decision on the costs of the proceedings will be taken in the judgement on the merits of the case.”

This ruling does not determine the validity of the applicant's conviction or the merits of his allegations. Instead, it paves the way for the ECOWAS Court to proceed with considering whether the alleged violations occurred and if Nigeria bears liability for any breach of its international human rights obligations. Mr. Rhahor is seeking declarations that his trial and conviction breached his fundamental rights, an order for his release, and damages totaling USD 50 million for the alleged violations. The Federal Republic of Nigeria has denied these allegations and urged the Court to dismiss the action. With the preliminary jurisdictional challenge now resolved, attention will shift to the substantive hearing of the case, a development that could have significant implications for the protection of fair trial rights and the extent of ECOWAS Court oversight regarding human rights complaints arising from domestic judicial proceedings in member states.