The International Journal
of Not-for-Profit Law

Volume 8, Issue 4, August 2006

By Ovunda V.C. Okene1

From the time that trade unions first emerged in Nigeria, they have suffered crude treatment and abuse from the government. The abuses were particularly grave during several years of military rule. Although Nigeria has returned to democratic governance, the abridgment of trade union rights continues. This article argues that through such behavior, the government of Nigeria infringes workers’ freedom of association under international law – which does not augur well for the nation’s future as a liberal democracy.

“Without freedom of mind and of association a man has no means to self-protection in our social order.” – Harold Laski2

1. INTRODUCTION

Freedom of association is generally regarded as safeguarding individual civil liberties. Following the principle that people may do whatever they wish as long as they do not harm others, an individual should be free to join an organization and to act in association with others as long as no harm is caused. The right to freedom of association is promoted throughout the world. “Freedom of association,” said Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, then Prime Minister of Nigeria, at the opening of the first International Labour Organization African Regional Conference, in Lagos, Nigeria, in 1960, “is one of the foundations on which we build our free nations.”3

The concept of freedom of association in labor relations means that workers can form, join, or belong to a trade union and engage in collective bargaining. It also implies that the workers are entitled to go on strike whenever necessary. Members thus enjoy the right to associate for union purposes and the right to participate in all union activities. These rights are recognized both in international law and in all civilized countries of the world. If, without justification, the public authorities threaten the life and limb of the unionist to prevent him or her from taking part in union activities, freedom of association is violated.

Nigerian trade unions have long suffered mistreatment by the government – indeed, it dates back to the unions’ founding. The abuses and violations of rights were particularly severe during the years of military rule, from 1984 to 1999. Though Nigeria has returned to democratic governance and joined the comity of civilized nations, the rights of trade unions are still being violated.

This article examines the government’s disturbing pattern of behavior. We argue that the public authorities infringe the right to associate under international law by denying, limiting, or violating workers’ freedom to associate for their collective interests. The scope of the article is limited to state interference with workers’ freedom of association. Other limitations, such as those imposed by employers, are not discussed in detail.

2. FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

The concept of freedom of association is widely acknowledged as a fundamental right in international law. There are several sources. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948, proclaims that “Everyone has the right of freedom of peaceful assembly and association.” Article 23, paragraph 4, also states that “Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.” The same principle is echoed in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)4 and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)5 both of 1966. The International Labour Organization (ILO) likewise recognizes freedom of association as a fundamental principle in several major documents, the most important ones being the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention 1948 (No. 87)6 and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention 1949 (No. 98).7 Further, the right to freely associate is guaranteed in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) 1950,8 the European Social Charter (ESC) 1996,9 the American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR) 1969,10 the Community Charter of Fundamental Social Rights of Worker (CCFSRW) 1989,11, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (EUCFR) 2000,12 and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) 1981.13 In sum, there can be no doubt that international law recognizes the right to freedom of association and the right to organize.14

3. SOURCES OF THE RIGHT TO ASSOCIATE IN NIGERIAN LAW

Nigeria is a member of the Governing Body of the ILO and has ratified ILO Conventions 87 and 98. Nigeria has also ratified both ICESCR and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Accordingly, Nigeria is bound by these instruments. This means that workers and trade union organizations in Nigeria, like those in most other countries, have the right to lodge complaints with the ILO Committee on Freedom of Association concerning any abridgments of workers’ freedoms.

Besides these instruments, constitutional and legislative provisions protect the exercise of freedom of association by workers and employers.

3.1 Constitutional Basis for Workers Freedom of Association

The freedom to associate has a constitutional basis in Nigeria. Section 40 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 provides as follows:

Every person shall be entitled to assembly freely and associate with other persons, and in particular he may form or belong to any political party, trade union or any association for the protection of his interests.

Section 40 holds great significance, for it gives the labor movement a constitutional right to associate. The Constitution further protects the worker’s right not only to belong to but also to form a trade union. Thus the Constitution bars a “closed shop”15 agreement, “yellow dog” contract, or any other arrangement that compels a worker to join a particular union or that excludes the worker from union membership. This covers both private employers and the government itself when acting as employer. This means that a worker can decline to join union X and instead form or join union Y.16 Finally, the Constitution provides for access to court to remediate any breach of the right to associate. Section 46 of the Constitution states as follows:

Any person who alleges that his right to form, join or belong to a trade union of his choice has been, is being or is likely to be infringed may apply to a High Court in the State in which the infringement is threatened or has occurred for redress.

3.2 The African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights

Another source of freedom of association of workers in Nigeria can be found in the African [ Banjul] Charter of Human and Peoples Rights 1981. Article 10 of the Charter provides that “Every individual shall have a right to free association provided that he abides by the law.” Nigeria has ratified this Charter and made it a part of national law.17 In Abacha v Fawehinmi,18 the Supreme Court held that since the African Charter has been incorporated into Nigerian law, it enjoys a status higher than a mere international convention; it is part of Nigerian corpus juris.

3.3 Other Sources of Protection

Other sources of the protection of the right to associate in Nigeria can be found under Section 9(6) of the Labour Act 199019 and Section 12 of the Trade Unions Act 1990.20 These sections show that the right to associate and belong to trade unions is open to all, regardless of ethnicity, religion, or political affiliation. They also forbid discriminating against workers based on union membership or non-membership.

4. STATE INTERFERENCE WITH WORKERS FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION

The right of all members to participate in trade union activities flows from the right of workers to associate for trade union purposes. Any unlawful and unjustified action by the public authorities that impairs the right of the unionist to actively participate in union activities will violate the right to free association. In the travaux preparatoires leading to the adoption of ILO Convention 87, it was noted that

Freedom of industrial association is but one aspect of freedom of association in general, which must itself form part of the whole range of fundamental liberties of man, all interdependent and complementary one to another, including freedom of assembly and of meeting, freedom of speech and opinion, freedom of expression and of the press and so forth.21

Article 8 of Convention 87 specifically provides that “The law of the land shall not be such as to impair, nor shall it be so applied as to impair the guarantees provided for in the convention.”

The ILO has identified certain civil liberties as essential for the exercise of trade union rights. In Nigeria, unfortunately, the state has continued to deny trade unions the free exercise of these liberties.

4.1 The Right to Personal Dignity and Safety

Freedom of association extends to the personal dignity and safety of workers; they must be free to associate and organize without fear or molestation. This is a significant aspect of trade union rights. However, it is not uncommon to hear of violence, injuries, loss of life, cruelty, torture and other forms of ill treatment, forced exile, and disappearances of workers all over the world.22 Many workers who try to form trade unions are spied on, harassed, pressured, threatened, suspended, fired, deported, or otherwise victimized in reprisal for exercising their right to freedom of association.23 The state must ensure that the lives of workers and especially their leadership are protected from both the state itself and others.24

In Nigeria, workers’ right to personal dignity and safety is very precarious. Violence against trade unionists is endemic, including murder, disappearance, intimidation, torture, harassment, and detention. In 2002, shortly after the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC) declared a nationwide strike over the increase of petroleum prices, security agents rounded up Adams Oshiomhole, the NLC president, and several other labor leaders, including Dr. Dipo Fashina, president of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU). Sixteen other union leaders were arrested in Port Harcourt, Rivers State, while twenty-five persons, including the state secretary of NLC, Wale Olaniyan, were locked up in Ogun State by the police. In the course of the Abuja arrests, the police exhibited excessive brutality. They seized the NLC president’s car and savagely beat up Dare Agbaje, the driver. ASUU president Fashina had his shirt turn and one of his fingers broken. Throughout a twenty-four hour stint in detention, they were not allowed to receive any medical attention.25 Much earlier, Milton Dabibi, general secretary of the Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers Union (PENGASSAN), and Frank Kokori, general secretary of National Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG), were detained in 1994 and 1996, respectively, for more than two years without charge or trial. When they fell into poor health, access to medical care was denied them.

With the use of the police and other law enforcement agencies to harass and assault trade unions in Nigeria, the state cannot deny responsibility. A government spokesman recently warned labor against what he described as “unnecessary confrontation,” and added that the government would not tolerate “any excessive militancy” from them.26 This sort of statement suggests that the government tacitly supports the attacks against unions. Even where unions and workers are harassed by people outside the government, responsibility still rests on the government, for it turns a blind eye to the atrocities. Nigerian trade unions were in the vanguard of the nationalist movement, which eventually led to Nigerian independence and freedom for all citizens. It is disturbing that they are now treated as enemies by the government. The secretary general of the Organisation of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU) has expressed a similar view:

As a trade unionist, the question that worries me most is why trade unions which fought side by side with political parties to dislodge colonialists …are not now accepted by African Governments.… [T]rade unionists are in jail or in detention … some under investigation, splits are being encouraged to weaken trade union leadership … some unions are facing threats of dissolution. There are trade unionists living in exile because they have displeased home governments.27

In sum, the abuses of trade union rights remain a sore point in Nigeria.

4.2 Freedom of Assembly

It is very important that trade union organizations be able to organize meetings and other activities without having to seek permission from the authorities. ILO Convention 87 recognizes this fact by providing that “the public authorities shall refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof.”28

Yet that has not consistently been the case in Nigeria. Organizations frequently must seek official authorization before holding a public meeting or gathering. Such a requirement can greatly diminish the exercise of free association, especially when workers seek to engage in activities that the authorities may consider a challenge against their own policies and programs. The Nigerian Public Order Act is a radical example here: it empowers the authorities to prohibit gatherings or mass meetings generally.29 Unionists could be prevented from gathering to discuss a contemplated strike, for example, or to conduct an election.

Giving such wide discretionary powers to a functionary of a state that is openly hostile to trade unions is bound to lead to abuse of power. In August 2002, for example, the Federal government without reasonable cause dissolved the executive committee of the Maritime Workers Union of Nigeria (MWUN). Without an executive council or committee, a union cannot assemble to discuss and further the interests of members.

4.3 Freedom of Opinion and Expression

The right of trade unions to function freely and properly can be affected by state or other form of censorship. Unionists need to be able to express their views openly, without fear of reprisals from the state or others. The presence of police or other security at trade union meetings could chill the freedom of expression of trade unionists and their participation in trade union activities.

Even though the Nigerian Constitution guarantees freedom of expression for every citizen, authorities take brutal measures against those trade unions perceived to be working against their interests. The Nigerian Union of Journalists has persistently complained of violations of its members’ rights. On January 4, 2002, for example, an anonymous caller who claimed to be working in tandem with the State Security Services (SSS) in Ibadan, the Oyo State capital, in a telephone conversation with Bayo Oladeji of the Nigerian Tribune, said in a muffled voice, “your [telephone] number is under surveillance and we know what you have been doing with it, especially Bayo Oladeji. This call is from the SSS and we are going to sweep that house very soon.”30 The reason for this threat was plainly articles considered unfavourable to those in power.

The Committee on Freedom of Association believes that a union’s Convention 87 rights preclude any requirement that it submit all communications and publications for approval before distributing them.31 Any such requirement could both invade privacy and erode the autonomy and independence of trade unions and their members. The Committee on Freedom of Association also considers that the full exercise of trade union rights calls for a free flow of information, opinions, and ideas, and that workers, employers, and their organizations should enjoy freedom of opinion and expression at meetings, in publications, and in the course of other activities.32

4.4 Protection of Trade Union Property

Government and its functionaries should treat trade union property like any other private property: as inviolable without reasonable justification. Searches of trade union offices and the dwellings of trade union members should be carried out only with proper warrant and in strict compliance with the purpose of the warrant. Trade union property should also be safeguarded from unwarranted destruction.

In Nigeria, government disrespect for trade union property is commonplace. The Nigerian Labour Congress and its affiliate trade unions (more than 50) have been raided by the authorities without legitimate cause. In the recent ILO Case No. 2267/Nigeria (2004) Complaint Against the Government of Nigeria on Freedom of Association, the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) brought a complaint to the ILO concerning violations of freedom of association and gross infringement of trade union rights, including summary dismissal of academic staff because they had taken strike action, and harassment and victimization of trade union members. Following strike actions by ASUU in 2001, 2002, and 2003, forty-nine lecturers of the University of Illorin were dismissed, union property vandalized and removed, and premises were sealed. Staffs purportedly dismissed were also brutally evicted from their living quarters.

These actions were stoutly condemned by the ILO Committee on Freedom of Association, and the Nigerian Court ordered the government to reinstate the dismissed lecturers and restore trade union property. Even so, the government has done nothing by way of taking remedial steps.

4.5 International Affiliation.

International affiliation is certainly one of the basic trade union rights enshrined in Convention 87 of the ILO. Article 5 provides that

Workers’ and employers’ organisations shall have the right to establish and join federations and confederations and any such organisations, federation or confederation shall have the right to affiliate with international organisations of workers and employers.

However, the Nigerian state has continued to deny trade unions the full opportunity to exercise their right to freedom of association in this regard. The successive military regimes between 1985 and 1999 completely banned international affiliation by trade unions. The present civilian administration is similarly hostile. Large international affiliates have helped trade unions grow in many developing countries. By affiliating with other organizations, a trade union can gain access to financial assistance, training, and other benefits. It is ironic that the same government that goes about the world seeking aid and debt forgiveness will not let its trade unions freely seek international affiliation so as to benefit from potential assistance.

International affiliation would bring Nigerian trade unions into contact with their counterparts in both industrialized and Third World countries of Asia, the Caribbean, Latin America, and the Pacific, thereby providing a useful forum for the exchange of views and ideas, mutual cooperation and assistance, alliance on international industrial action, and other ways to find solutions to workers’ problems. When it bars such affiliations, the government of Nigeria violates freedom of association.

5. TOWARD PROTECTING TRADE UNION RIGHTS IN NIGERIA: PRESCRIPTIONS

As we have seen, the rights of trade unions in Nigeria are routinely violated. The ILO has repeatedly voiced outrage over Nigeria’s continued flouting of labor rights. The government’s actions arise out of arrogance and show contempt for the people. What can be done to solve these problems?

5.1 Absolute respect for the Rule of Law

Beyond doubt, the history of military domination of politics and governance largely accounts for the authoritarianism of the Nigerian state today. But those times are past. Democracy extols the rule of law. The rule of law seeks to ensure that a government acts within the constraints of its constitution. It also provides for equality before the law and due process of law. Now that Nigeria has returned to full-fledged democratic governance, the government must respect the rule of law and the human rights of the citizens, including the rights of trade unionists. The government should be bound by its constitutional provisions. As a constitutional government, it should not take any arbitrary action to violate trade union rights. To do otherwise is to foster an environment where authoritarianism flourishes, the rule of law is negated, and neither officials nor private entities respect trade union rights and dignity. Of particular importance here is the ILO Case Against the Government of Nigeria, brought by the ASUU. The government should recall the forty-nine dismissed lecturers of the University of Illorin and restore the destroyed and confiscated trade union property.

5.2 Judicial Role

The judiciary plays a very prominent role in a society governed by the rule of law. The judiciary has the important tasks of interpreting the constitution and defining the scope and limits of the powers of both the executive and the legislature. Court represents the last hope of the common man against the powers of government, which makes it essential for the judiciary to exhibit a high sense of duty and commitment to the cause of justice. The judiciary must annul and invalidate any governmental or other action that violates trade union rights in Nigeria. It must fearlessly ensure that the constitution and laws of the land are fully complied with. If the courts will intervene in such matters, then we can begin to see a ray of hope for protecting trade union rights in Nigeria. As the American Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black pointed out in Chambers v. Florida,

Courts stand as havens of refuge for those who might otherwise suffer because they are helpless, weak, outnumbered, or victims of prejudice or public excitement.33

Trade union rights must not be allowed to suffer at the hands of the Nigerian state. The time is thus ripe for the Nigerian judiciary to embrace the legitimate authorities of judges and invalidate all acts that violate trade union rights. The Nigerian Constitution makes the executive and legislative powers subject to the provisions of the constitution34 and to the courts.35 These provisions authorize the judiciary to play an active role.36 It should do so.

5.3 Compliance with International Labor Standards

There is the urgent need for Nigeria to comply with all the ILO Conventions to protect trade union rights. At a time when most countries are fighting to protect the human and trade union rights of citizens, Nigeria must not take a retrograde step, one that will deprive it of full standing in the international milieu of states that comply with international labor standards.

The time is ripe for legislative intervention. In line with the ILO’s principles and standards, all draconian decrees and laws that have infringed upon workers’ and unionist’s rights in Nigeria should be removed from our statute books immediately. Compliance with international labor standards will do much to ensure the protection of trade union rights in Nigeria.

6. CONCLUSION

Nigeria continues to violate trade union rights, contrary to both its own constitution and international standards. A few of the violations have been discussed here, but we must stress that this account is far from exhaustive, for violations of workers and trade union rights are usually unreported.

The Nigerian authorities must provide an enabling environment for freedom of association, in which trade unions can flourish. The status quo, with union leaders and other unionists hounded and arrested with no regard for due process, is unacceptable. Like other liberal democracies, the government of Nigeria must respect the rights that trade unions derive from the freedom of association.37 Indeed, it should encourage and empower unions to help with the task of economic development.

We agree with Harold Laski that “Without freedom of mind and of association a man has no means to self-protection in our social order.”38 One must hope that Nigeria will unleash its trade unions and restore its posture as a liberal democratic nation that respects the rule of law.

REFERENCES

Ananaba, W. 1979. The Trade Union Movement in Africa, p. 175. London: C. Hurst & Company.

Ben-Israel, R. 1988. International Labour Standards: The Case of the Freedom to Strike, pp. 25- 29. Deventer: Kluwer.

Compa, L. 2003. “Workers’ Freedom of Association in the United States: The Gap between Ideals and Practice.” In Workers’ Rights as Human Rights, J. Gross (ed.), p. 32. New York: Cornell University Press.

Creighton, W.B. 1990. “Freedom of Association.” In Blanpain, R. (ed.), Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations. Deventer: Kluwer.

Hodges-Aeberhard, J., and Odero de Dios, A. 1988. “Principles of the Committee on Freedom of Association Concerning Strikes.” International Labour Review 126: 543.

Jenks, C.W. 1955. “International Protection of Freedom of Association for Trade Union Purposes.” International Labour Review 87 (1): 1-115

Jenks, C.W. 1957. The International Protection of Trade Union Freedom, pp. 181-183 London: Stevens and Sons.

Johnston, G.A. 1970. The International Labour Organisation, p. 150. London: Europa Publications.

Laski, H. 1948. Liberty in the Modern State, p. 195. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.

Leader, S. 1992. Freedom of Association: A Study in Labor Law and Political Theory, pp. 123-265. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

Morris, G. 1994. “Freedom of Association and the Interests of the State.” In Human Rights and Labour Law: Essays for Paul O’Higgins, Ewing, K.D., Gearty, C.A., and Hepple, B.A., (eds.), p. 2. London and New York: Mansell Publishing Limited.

Swepston, L. 1998. “Human Rights and Freedom of Association: Development through ILO Supervision.” International Labour Review 137(2): 169-194.

Valticos, N. 1984. “International Labour Law.” In International Encyclopaedia for Labour Law and Industrial Relations, Blanpain, R. (ed.), pp. 79-92, 239-53. Deventer: Kluwer.

Notes

1 Ovunda V.C. Okene, LL.B. (Hons.), LL.M., is a Senior Lecturer in Law, Faculty of Law, Rivers State University of Science and Technology, Port Harcourt, Nigeria. From 2001 to 2004 he was the Head of the Department of Business Law of the same university. He is also a Solicitor and Advocate of the Supreme Court of Nigeria and Senior Partner in the law firm of Okene & Okene, Port Harcourt, Nigeria. Mr. Okene is currently working toward his doctorate degree in law at the University of Essex, Colchester, United Kingdom. His research interests include human rights, labor law and labor rights, conflict studies, international and comparative studies, and interdisciplinary and socio-legal studies. He can be reached at ovcoke@essex.ac.uk or ovcokene@yahoo.com.

2 Liberty in the Modern State (London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1948), p. 195.

3 Johnston, G.A., The International Labour Organisation (London: Europa Publications, 1970), p. 150.

4 Article 8 (1) (a)-(c).

5 Article 22(1).

6 See Articles 2-7.

7 See Articles 1-6.

8 Article 11.

9 Part 1, paragraph 5, and Article 5.

10 Article 16.

11 Article 11.

12 Article 12(1).

13 Article 10.

14 For more detailed discussion of these instruments, see Swepston, L., “Human Rights and Freedom of Association: Development through ILO Supervision,” 137:2 International Labour Review 169-194 (1998); Gillian Morris, “Freedom of Association and the Interests of the State,” in Ewing, K.D., Gearty, C.A., and Hepple, B.A. (eds. ), Human Rights and Labour Law: Essays for PaulO’Higgins (London and New York: Mansell Publishing Limited, 1994), p. 2; Leader, S., Freedom of Association: A Study in Labor Law andPolitical Theory (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1992), pp. 123-265; Valticos, N., “International Labour Law,” in Blanpain, R. (ed.), International Encyclopaedia for Labour Law andIndustrial Relations (Deventer: Kluwer, 1984), pp. 79-92, 239-53; Creighton, W.B., “Freedom of Association,” in Blanpain, R.(ed.), Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations (Deventer: Kluwer, 1990), Chapter 17; Ben-Israel, R., International Labour Standards: The Case of the Freedom toStrike (Deventer: Kluwer, 1988); Hodges-Aeberhard, J., and Odero de Dios, A., “Principles of the Committee on Freedom of Association Concerning Strikes,” 126 International Labour Review 543 (1988); Jenks, C.W., The International Protection of Trade Union Freedom (London: Stevens and Sons, 1957), pp. 181-183; Jenks, C.W., “International Protection of Freedom of Association for Trade Union Purposes,” 87:1 International Labour Review 1-115 (1955).

15 A closed shop is an agreement, usually between a trade union or unions on the one hand and the employer on the other, that makes union membership a condition of employment or continued employment. A closed shop seriously limits a worker’s freedom to belong to a union of his choice.

16 See Basorun v Industrial Arbitration Tribunal, Unreported Suit No. LD/105/71, High Court of Lagos State, cited in Uvieghara, E.E., Labour Law in Nigeria ( Lagos and Oxford, 2001), p. 319.

17 See African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act, Chapter 10, Laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1990.

18 (2000) 6 NWLR (Part 660) 228(SC).

19 Chapter 198, Laws of the Federationof Nigeria 1990.

20 Chapter 437, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990.

21 ILO: Freedom of Association and Industrial Relations, Report VII, IL Conference, 30th Session, 1947, p. 11.

22 This is clearly the terrible situation that Nigerian trade unionists increasingly face.

23 Compa, L., “Workers’ Freedom of Association in the United States: The Gap between Ideals and Practice,” in Gross, J.A. (ed.), Workers’ Rights as Human Rights ( New York: Cornell University Press, 2003), p. 32.

24 See ILO: Committee on Freedom of Association, 217th Report, Para. 493.

25 See 2002 Annual Report on the Human Rights Situation in Nigeria (Nigeria: Committee for the Defence of Human Rights [CDHR], 2002), p. 131.

26 Ibid .

27 Wogu Ananaba, The Trade Union Movement in Africa (London: C. Hurst & Company, 1979), p. 175.

28 See Article 3(2).

29 Public Order Act, Chapter 382, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990, especially sections 1-4.

30 See 2002 Annual Report, n. 25 above.

31 See General Survey, 1983, Para 68.

32 General Survey, 1994, Para. 38.

33 309 U.S. 227, 241 (1940).

34 Sections 6 and 4 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, respectively.

35 Section 4(8), Ibid.,

36 See Eso, K., Thoughts on Law and Jurisprudence (Lagos: MIJ Professional Publishers Ltd., 1990), pp. 170-171.

37 See Sheldon Leader, Freedom of Association: A Study in Labor Law and Political Theory (Yale University Press, 1992), p. 269.

38 Liberty in the Modern State, n. 2, above, p. 195. See also Morse, D., The Origin and Evolution of the ILO and itsRole in the World Community (1969), p. 58, cited in David L. Gregory “The Right to Unionise as a Fundamental Human and Civil Right,” 9 Mississippi College Law Review 35-54 (1988).