Abstract
The National Industrial Court of Nigeria (NICN) in David Achika & Ors. v. N.K.S.T. Hospital Mkar & Anor adopted the expressio unius est exclusio alterius rule of interpretation and held that a Special Adviser (SA) on legal matters appointed on a permanent basis, with salary is not prohibited from engaging in private law practice while serving because he is not a public officer (PO) within the framework of part 2 of Code of Conduct for Public Officers (CCPO). This paper, through doctrinal method, reviews this decision by examining the propriety of permitting a Special Adviser on full-time basis and remuneration to engage in private law practice (PLP). It interrogates the nuances of permanent employment/engagement and argues that while an SA is not mentioned in Part 2 of the CCPO, engagement in PLP fosters divided attention despite being remunerated on full-time basis and it is a detraction from the notion of full-time employment/engagement. It further contends that engagement in PLP can expose a political appointee to conflict of interest which should be avoided. It makes recommendations on the amendment of the 5th Schedule to the 1999 Constitution to include political appointees within the prohibited ambit of persons to engage in private practice.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
