Rivers State University Journal of Public Law

Abstract
The question of whether a Court can raise an issue suo motu and determine it suo motu cannot be
resolved easily. This is because, on one hand, it seems forbidden for a Court to raise issues suo motu
and make it the basis of its decision as this offends the rule of fair hearing- audi alteram partem.
Conversely, circumstances exist when, in the interest of justice, a Court of law is consecrated with the
vires to raise issue suo motu and resolve it suo motu. How then can parties in litigation or the Court
itself discern these exceptions? To untangle this legal conundrum, this paper deployed the doctrinal
research method and examined judicial decisions that outlaw raising and resolving issues suo motu
and those that recognised exceptions to this general rule. The paper found out that even in those
exceptional circumstances, the need to accord parties fair hearing cannot be diminished. Hence, it was
recommended that for procedural fairness, the Court should seldom raise and determine issues suo
motu and when constrained to do so, it must be in the interest of justice and ensure that the facts in
support of the issue raised suo motu exist in the litigation.

DOWNLOAD PDF