The human rights lawyer says a court of first and last resort has left litigants with no way to challenge legal errors — and left member states free to ignore rulings they don’t like.
Human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria Femi Falana has renewed calls for the ECOWAS Commission to establish an appellate division within the ECOWAS Court of Justice, arguing that the absence of a second tier of review has become one of the community court’s most serious structural weaknesses.
Falana made the appeal in a formal letter dated June 29, 2026, addressed to ECOWAS Commission President Omar Alieu Touray. The letter revives a reform that has been on the table for two decades: as far back as 2005, the ECOWAS Council of Ministers approved the creation of an appellate division and directed the Commission to carry out feasibility studies. Those studies never translated into action, and the court has operated ever since as both the first and the final word on every case it hears.
That structure, Falana argues, has real consequences. Litigants who believe a panel misapplied the law or mishandled procedure currently have nowhere to turn — there is no higher chamber within the ECOWAS system to correct a mistaken ruling. Falana quoted Nigeria’s Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, who has made the same point: “The absence of a separate appellate mechanism limits access to justice, especially in cases where errors of law or procedure may have occurred.”
Falana’s letter goes further than a general complaint about structure — it lays out specific examples of the court reversing itself on similar facts. On standing to sue, the court once allowed non-governmental organisations to bring public interest cases without proving they personally suffered harm, only to later require victim authorisation in comparable cases. On Nigeria’s Cybercrime Act, the court at one point ruled certain provisions repressive, then upheld similar provisions in a later case. And in disputes over the removal of judicial officers by member states, the court has declined jurisdiction in one matter while asserting authority over a nearly identical one elsewhere.
Taken together, Falana says, these contradictions have eroded confidence in the court among both governments and citizens, and have given reluctant member states cover to disregard judgments they find inconvenient — undermining the very enforcement mechanism the court exists to provide.
The ECOWAS Court of Justice began hearing cases in 2001 and, since a 2005 expansion of its jurisdiction, has allowed individuals and companies direct access to bring human rights claims without first exhausting domestic remedies — a relatively unusual and, for many West African litigants, valuable feature among regional courts. But that same accessibility has meant a steadily growing caseload flowing through a single-tier system never designed to absorb it.
“With the urgent need to enhance the capacity of judges and restore the confidence of member states and citizens, the appellate division should be established without further delay,” Falana said, calling on the Commission to finally act on a reform its own Council of Ministers endorsed in principle two decades ago.