MALPRACTICE

Medical malpractice poses significant risks to patient safety and healthcare systems in Nigeria. It examines the legal consequences of medical malpractice in Nigeria through a comparative analysis with other jurisdictions and explores the country's obligations to respect, protect and fulfill the rights of citizens by providing good healthcare services. It assesses Nigeria's existing legal frameworks and compares it with international frameworks. The study investigates the domestic legal landscape including the Nigerian constitution legislation, policies and programs related to healthcare services, highlighting the gaps and challenges in realizing the rights to adequate compensation with proof of negligence. This project undertakes a comprehensive legal analysis of the rights of patients. The paper compared the medical negligence jurisprudence in Nigeria and the United States of America with particular reference to the state of Texas. This research employs the doctrinal method of research which would be anchored on primary and secondary information such as journals, textbooks, dictionaries, literature and other internet sources commentaries. It was hereafter discovered that the medical negligence jurisprudence in Texas is robust, structured, and well-defined compared to what is obtainable in Nigeria. The study highlights the need for legal reforms to strengthen patient's rights, enhance accountability, improve compensation mechanisms and provide more effective legal responses to medical malpractice in Nigeria while using other countries as example. Medical practice usually involves different activities which,if not professionally handled,may give rise to liabilities on the part of the medical practitioner. These liabilities may arise in tortious claims and in some other cases,may go beyond the realm of civil liabilities to criminal liabilities.

This study, titled Election Petitions: Towards Curbing Electoral Malpractice in Nigeria, critically examines the role of election petitions in promoting electoral integrity within Nigeria’s democratic framework. Elections, though indispensable to representative government, have been persistently undermined by malpractice, including vote buying, ballot stuffing, intimidation, and falsification of results. The study interrogates whether Nigeria’s system of election petitions is adequate to address these challenges. Using a doctrinal and comparative methodology, the study reviewed constitutional and statutory provisions, judicial decisions, and scholarly works. It analysed the jurisdiction of tribunals and courts, procedures, grounds, timelines, and remedies in electoral adjudication. It also examines electoral offences under the Electoral Act 2022 and how election petitions and criminal prosecution in Nigeria have helped to curb electoral malpractice in Nigeria, and its challenges. The study found that while election petitions are indispensable for resolving disputes and legitimizing elections, they are constrained by heavy evidentiary burdens, strict timelines, judicial technicalities, and high litigation costs. There is also the issue of weak enforcement of electoral offences. Comparative analysis revealed best practices such as Kenya’s emphasis on technology and transparency, as well as Romania and Ghana’s electoral commission accountability, and India’s robust judicial sanctions. The study concludes that Nigeria’s system requires reform to strengthen judicial independence, ease evidentiary burdens, improve INEC’s accountability, and establish an Electoral Offences Commission. Such reforms will enhance the deterrent effect of election petitions, curb malpractice, and consolidate democratic governance.