Feature/OPED

The Constitutionality of S. 396 (7) ACJA in Light of Provisions of Constitution

Published

7 years ago

14/12/2018

Modupe Gbadeyanka

By Benita Ayo

Overview

This is a commentary on the paper presented by a learned Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Asiwaju Adegboyega Awomolo where he examines the issue of the vacuum created when a judge who is conducting a criminal trial is elevated to the Court of Appeal, as well as the conflict between the provisions of the constitution and the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) when this situation arises.

With the aid of decided cases, he concluded that in this instance, an elevated judicial officer cannot continue to hear the matter because from the point of elevation, he/she lacks the requisite jurisdiction to do so.

According to him, the only resolution to the issue, is for the matter to be commenced ‘de novo’ before another judge having the requisite jurisdiction to hear the matter.

The said Section 396 (7) ACJA provides as follows;

“Notwithstanding the provision of any other law to the contrary, A judge of the High Court who has been elevated to the Court of Appeal shall have dispensation to continue to sit as a high court Judge, only for the purpose of concluding any partly heard criminal matter pending before him at the time of his elevation, and shall conclude the same within a reasonable time, provided that this section shall not prevent him from assuming duty as a Justice of a Court of Appeal.”

Now, Section 1 (1) and 1 (3) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria provides that;

“1(1) This Constitution is supreme and its provisions shall have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout the Federation Republic of Nigeria.”

For purposes of clarity, its Section 1(3) goes further to state:

“1(3) If any other law is inconsistent with the provision of this Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail, and other law shall to the extent of the inconsistency be void.”

COMMENTS

The issues arising from the conflicts are;

Jurisdiction of a Justice of the Court of Appeal to continue to sit over a matter at the State High Court
The doctrine of the supremacy of the constitution (1999 as amended)
Whether indeed, s. 396 (7) ACJA is inconsistent with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (As amended)
JURISDICTION OF A JUSTICE OF THE COURT OF APPEAL TO CONTINUE TO SIT OVER A MATTER AT THE STATE HIGH COURT.

Generally speaking, Jurisdiction means the official power to make legal decisions and judgments. It is also the extent of the power to make legal decisions and judgments.

In FBN LTD v. ABRAHAM (2008) LPELR-1281 (SC), the Court defined jurisdiction thus, ‘What is the meaning of jurisdiction? By judicial authorities, jurisdiction is the authority by which a court has to decide matters that are laid before it for litigation or to take cognizance of matters presented in a formal way for its decision. Let it be said that the limits of this authority are, by practice, imposed by statute or law under which the court is constituted. It may be extended or restricted by similar means. If no restriction is imposed, the jurisdiction is said to be unlimited’.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court per OPUTA, JSC (Pp. 39-40, paras. C-A) has defined jurisdiction in the case of ONYEMA & ORS v. OPUTA & ANOR (1987) LPELR-2736 (SC) that; ‘It is thus necessary for the proper appreciation of the issues in this case to understand the concept and content of “jurisdiction”. Briefly stated jurisdiction as it applies to courts can mean one of two things:-

1. The abstract right of a court to exercise its powers in causes of a certain class, or

2. The right of a court or tribunal to exercise its powers with respect to a particular subject matter.

In one sense, the broader sense, jurisdiction refers to the legal authority, the legal capacity, to adjudicate at all; while in the narrower sense it refers to the power of the court over the particular subject matter in dispute, over the res or property in contest. This latter sense may be referred to, as territorial jurisdiction, or venue, or the area of authority – the geographical area beyond which the court’s power (or legal jurisdiction) is not to be extended.’

CLASSES/TYPES OF JURISDICTION

Jurisdiction may be any of the following;

Territorial (This is the power or authority to preside over a particular location or venue e.g. the Federal High Court has jurisdiction over the entire territory of Nigeria but the State High Court only have jurisdiction over the state in which it is located)
Subject matter (The authority to adjudicate over certain causes of action. An example is the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court to preside over Admiralty matters and Issues bordering on the interpretation of the provisions of CAMA)
Exclusive (This is the right to hear a matter to the exclusion of other courts e.g, the Supreme Court have exclusive jurisdiction to hear matters between the Federation and the State)
Concurrent (This is where the right to hear a matter is shared between more than one court)
Original (This is right to hear a matter before any other court. e.g, the Court of Appeal has original jurisdiction to hear matters on whether the President or Vice-President has been validly elected, whether the term of the President has ceased or become vacant See s. 239(1) CFRN 199 (As amended).
Appellate (This is the authority to hear appeals from lower courts e.g. is the Court of Appeal has the appellate jurisdiction over appeal from the Federal High Court, State High Court, National Industrial Court)
Substantive (This pertains to matters which the court may specifically adjudicate upon as stipulated by statute)
Procedural ( This pertains to the compliance of certain rules and principles of the court. this type of jurisdiction can be waived)

It is settled law that jurisdiction is the foundation of any court proceeding. Its importance is so fundamental to the matter that it can be raised at any time even up to the Supreme Court for the first time. A court cannot assume jurisdiction or confer itself with jurisdiction where it lacks same. In the case of CBN v. AUTO IMPORT EXPORT & ANOR (2012) LPELR-7858 (CA) the court held as follows;

“It has been stated, time without number, in a plethora of authorities, that jurisdiction is the threshold and livewire that determines the authority of a Court of law or tribunal to entertain a case before it. This is absolutely so, because it is only when a Court is imbued or conferred with the necessary jurisdiction by the Constitution and law that it will have the judicial power and authority to entertain, hear and adjudicate upon any cause or matter brought before it by parties. Conversely, the absence of such requisite jurisdiction would render any proceedings purportedly conducted by Court an exercise in futility, thus null, void and of no effect whatsoever, no matter how well conducted. ……………….

It is equally a well settled principle, that where a Court lacks jurisdiction to try a matter or case, it fundamentally lacks the vires to hear, and adjudicate upon any issue therein. Thus, due to the complex and fundamental nature thereof, the issue of jurisdiction can be raised at any stage and point in time of the proceedings, at the trial Court, the Court of Appeal, or even the apex Court itself. This trite principle has been settled in a plethora of authorities, including the locus classicus thereof, MADUKOLU VS. NKEMDILM (1952) NSCC 374; (1952) 2 SCNLR 341.”

In the instant situation the question which comes to mind is whether a Judge of the High Court presiding over a criminal trial has the requisite jurisdiction to continue the hearing of the matter after he has been elevated to the Court of Appeal as a Justice.

I will say no because subject to the principles of hierarchy of courts in Nigeria, the Court of Appeal do not share concurrent jurisdiction with the State High Court in respect of any matter.

The Court of Appeal only has Appellate Jurisdiction to hear appeals from the High Court to it whereas the State High Court has jurisdiction to hear civil and criminal actions.

As stated before now, jurisdiction cannot be conferred on a court nor can parties by agreement confer same on the court where the statute creating such courts like in this case, the constitution has not conferred such jurisdiction.

I will like to bring to our minds the provisions of the constitution conferring jurisdiction on the High Court and Court of Appeal accordingly.

Section 239 (1) of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (As amended) conferred original jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal on the following matters and it expressly provides that;

(1) “Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the Court of Appeal shall, to the exclusion of any other court of law in Nigeria, have original jurisdiction to hear and determine any question as to whether-

(a) any person has been validly elected to the office of President, Vice-President, Governor or Deputy Governor under this Constitution; or

(b) the term of office of the President, Vice-President, Governor or Deputy-Governor has ceased; or

(c) the office of President, Vice-President, Governor or Deputy has become vacant

(2) In the hearing and determination of an election petition under paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section, the Court of Appeal shall be duly constituted if it consists of at least three Justices of the Court of Appeal”.

Section 240 provides that;

S. 240 “Subject to the provisions of this constitution, the Court of Appeal shall have Jurisdiction to the exclusion of any other court of law in Nigeria, to hear and determine appeals from the Federal High Court, the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, High Court of a State, Sharia Court of Appeal of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, Sharia Court of Appeal of a State, Customary Court of Appeal of the Federal Capital Territory, Customary Court of Appeal of a State and from decisions of a court martial or other tribunals as may be prescribed by an Act of the National Assembly.

Furthermore, the Court of Appeal is properly constituted where there are at least 3 Justices sitting. It does not have the requisite Jurisdiction to hear Criminal or Civil matters except on appeal from the State High Court.

On the other hand, section 270 of the constitution created the High Court of a State and section 272 (1) specifically confers the State High Court with its general jurisdiction where it provides that;

(1) “Subject to the provisions of section 251 and other provisions of this constitution, the High Court of a State shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine any civil proceedings in which the existence or extent of a legal right, power, duty, liability, privilege, interest, obligation or claim is in issue or to hear and determine any criminal proceedings involving or relating to any penalty, forfeiture, punishment or other liability in respect of an offence committed by any person.”

(2) The reference to civil or criminal proceedings in this section includes a reference to the proceedings which originate in the High Court of a State and those which are brought before the High Court to be dealt with by the court in the exercise of its appellate or supervisory jurisdiction.”

As it may be seen from the foregoing provisions, there is no where within the said sections as well as the ones stated above that a Justice of the Court of Appeal may continue with a matter he was previously hearing as a Judge of the State High Court. He simply lacks the jurisdiction to do so as the constitution never conferred it.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE SUPREMACY OF THE CONSTITUTION (1999 AS AMENDED)

This doctrine postulates that the constitution is the supreme law of the land and all other statutory enactment of the National Assembly where it is inconsistent with the provisions of the constitution shall to the extent of its inconsistency be null and void. (See s. 1 (3) 1999 CFRN (As amended))

This doctrine has been affirmed in the case of FBN PLC v. T.S.A. INDUSTRIES LTD (2010) LPELR-1283 (SC) where the court pronounced on the nature and effect of the supremacy of the constitution and held that;

“By virtue of the provision of Section 1(3) of the 1999 Constitution , the doctrine of supremacy of the Constitution demands that if any law is inconsistent with the provision of the 1999 Constitution, the Constitution shall prevail and the other law shall to the extent of the inconsistency be void. “

Also, in ABACHA & ORS. v. FAWEHINMI (2000) LPELR-14 (SC), the court stated that;

“The Constitution is the supreme law of the land; it is the grundnorm. Its supremacy has never been called to question in ordinary circumstances. For avoidance of doubt, the 1979 Constitution stated categorically in its Chapter 1, Section 1(1) as follows:

“1(1) This Constitution is supreme and its provisions shall have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout the Federation Republic of Nigeria.”

For purposes of clarity, its Section 1(3) goes further to state:

“1(3) If any other law is inconsistent with the provision of this Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail, and other law shall to the extent of the inconsistency be void.”

The nature of this doctrine is that there is no other law which is above the constitution of Nigerian. It is immaterial that such law was enacted by the National Assembly and assented to by the President. Such law, in as much as it is not in tune or in line with what has been provided for by the constitution shall to the extent of such inconsistency be void. Such law cannot stand and should not be regarded or enforced by the courts.

In the instant situation, the provision of the S. 396 (7) ACJA which provides as follows;

Section 1 (3) of the CFRN 1999 (As Amended) provides that;

“If any other law is inconsistent with the provisions of this Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail, and that other law shall to the extent of the inconsistency be void.”

Thus, in the instant case, it is unconstitutional for a Judge of the High Court elevated to a Justice of the Court of Appeal to continue to preside over a criminal matter in the High Court as he is no longer a Judge of the High Court no longer has jurisdiction over matters in such court.

Going further, the constitution has provided for the composition/constitution of a State High Court under S. 273 of the constitution where it provides that;

“For the purpose of exercising any jurisdiction conferred upon it under this constitution or any law, a High Court of a State shall be duly constituted if it consists of at least one Judge of that Court”

Going by the above provision, a Justice of the court of Appeal is not a judge of the State High Court and as such does not have the jurisdiction to preside over any matter whether partly heard by him or not in that court. Any decision of a court lacking the prerequisite jurisdiction constitutes a nullity and no one should submit to such jurisdiction and cannot agree to confer such jurisdiction where the statute creating such court has not created such jurisdiction.

WHETHER INDEED S. 396 (7) ACJA IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE CONSTITUTION OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA 1999 (AS AMENDED)

Section 396 (7) of the ACJA provides that;

And Section 1 (1) and (3) of the Constitution says;

“1(1) This Constitution is supreme and its provisions shall have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout the Federation Republic of Nigeria.”

For purposes of clarity, its Section 1(3) goes further to state:

“1(3) If any other law is inconsistent with the provision of this Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail, and other law shall to the extent of the inconsistency be void.”

The constitution has conferred different jurisdictions upon the High Court of a State and the Court of Appeal and they are no way similar. While the State High has jurisdiction to hear Civil and Criminal matters, the Court of Appeal has amongst others the jurisdiction to hear appeals from the State High Court, Federal High Court, National industrial Court and so on.

The composition of a State High Court according to the constitution is at least a Judge of the Court and I have stated earlier on that a Justice of the Court of Appeal is not a Judge of the State High Court at least not stated so by the Constitutional provisions creating the Court of Appeal.

Thus, it is not proper for a Justice of the Court of Appeal to continue with a matter which he was handling prior to his elevation as a Justice of the Court of Appeal. Jurisdiction, where it is non-existent, cannot be conferred on oneself nor can parties agree to it.

In the instant case, in light of the provisions of S. 1 (1) & (3) of the constitution, the provisions of S. 396 (7) ACJA is inconsistent with the constitution and is to the extent of its inconsistency null and void.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, having found that S. 396 (7) ACJA is inconsistent with the constitution, the said section should be expunged completely form the Act. It is my advise that where a Judge of a State High Court has been elevated to a higher office, any criminal matter that is being handled by him should be transferred to another trial Judge with concurrent jurisdiction as the former Judge prior to elevation and be allowed to commence de novo.

I completely agree with the submissions of the learned Senior Advocate that where a Judge has been elevated from the High Court to the Court of Appeal, any partly heard criminal matter by him should be allowed to commence de novo before another Judge with the requisite jurisdiction to hear same.

Benita Ayois a legal practitioner based in Lagos, Nigeria.

Feature/OPED

Anthony Chiejina: Africa’s Quiet Architect of Global Corporate Reputation

Published

7 hours ago

19/01/2026

Business Post Contributor

By Abiodun Alade

In a year shaped by geopolitical tension, technological disruption and intensifying scrutiny of corporate conduct, Anthony Chiejina has once again secured a place among the world’s most influential communications leaders.

In the orchestration of influence, some leaders make themselves heard; others, like Chiejina, make themselves felt. As Group Chief, Branding and Corporate Communications, Dangote Industries Limited, Africa’s largest industrial conglomerate, he operates not in the glare of the spotlight, but in the rarified space where strategy, trust and perception converge. Influence, in Chiejina’s world, is not performative. It is deliberate, calibrated and sustained.

His inclusion on the 2025 Influence 100 for the fifth consecutive year confirms his standing as one of the most consequential in-house communicators globally—and the only Nigerian on this year’s list.

Now in its 13th year, the Influence 100 has become a benchmark for leadership at the intersection of reputation, strategy and power. Compiled annually by PRovoke Media’s senior editorial team, the list recognises communications, corporate affairs and marketing executives whose judgement shapes organisational credibility, agency relationships and public trust. Selection is based on organisational influence, strategic remit, thought leadership and the capacity to lead through complexity.

Chiejina’s sustained presence on the list signals something deeper than recognition. It reflects a style of leadership defined not by volume, but by judgement.

Leadership Beyond Messaging

In today’s corporate environment, communications is no longer a support function. It is a leadership discipline. For Chiejina, that evolution has long been reality. His remit extends from strategic counsel at the highest level to internal alignment across a vast workforce, crisis navigation, regulatory engagement and long-term brand stewardship across sectors.

Dangote Group’s footprint spans cement, energy, agriculture, manufacturing and infrastructure—sectors that sit at the heart of national economies and global supply chains. Every decision, every word, carries weight beyond the corporation itself.

That responsibility has intensified as Dangote Group has undertaken some of the most ambitious industrial projects in Africa, drawing global attention and regulatory scrutiny. Managing reputation at this scale demands more than messaging. It requires institutional memory, political literacy and an acute understanding of how public legitimacy is earned and sustained.

Under his stewardship, Dangote Group has maintained its position as Africa’s most admired company while navigating periods of heightened public debate and international visibility. His work consistently connects corporate ambition with public confidence, ensuring that growth is matched by credibility.

Institutional Memory and Strategic Calm

More than 15 years within the Dangote Group have given Chiejina a rare asset: deep institutional memory. That continuity has proven invaluable during periods of expansion, regulatory change and market volatility. While others respond to headlines, he focuses on coherence, consistency and long-term trust.

Those who work with him describe a leader who privileges preparation over performance and clarity over drama. His approach is measured and analytical, grounded in the belief that reputation is not built in moments, but through years of disciplined engagement.

Chiejina’s fifth consecutive appearance on the Influence 100 places him among a peer group that includes communications chiefs from Apple, Google, Coca-Cola, Nike, Ford, Emirates, Reliance and other global giants. Yet he remains the only Nigerian on the 2025 list and one of the few Africa-based executives consistently recognised.

That distinction reflects both the scale of his responsibility and the growing global relevance of African corporate leadership. As Africa’s industrial champions assume a larger role in global supply chains and energy markets, the standards by which they are judged have become unmistakably international. Chiejina has helped ensure that Dangote Group meets those standards not through imitation, but through coherence, transparency and confidence in its own narrative.

Before joining Dangote Group, Chiejina built a career across banking, manufacturing and journalism, with senior roles at Zenith Bank, Oceanic Bank, Seven Up Bottling Company, African Economic Digest and African Concord—publications from the famed Concord Group that shaped a generation of African journalists. That breadth of experience continues to inform his leadership: commercially grounded, media-literate and alert to the political and economic realities that frame corporate action in emerging markets.

Quiet Authority

Anthony Chiejina’s leadership is marked by restraint. He is not a public-facing executive in the conventional sense, yet his counsel influences decisions at the highest level. In an era where reputations can be destabilised overnight, his value lies in foresight, discretion and strategic calm.

As global business becomes more exposed, more questioned and more accountable, leaders like Chiejina represent a new model of executive authority—one rooted in trust, institutional credibility and long-term thinking.

In that sense, his continued presence on the Influence 100 is not merely a personal milestone. It is a signal: that African enterprise, guided with discipline and clarity, belongs confidently at the centre of global leadership.

And in a world that increasingly confuses noise for power, Chiejina’s career offers a reminder: the most enduring influence is rarely the loudest.

Abiodun, a communications specialist, writes from Lagos

Feature/OPED

From Convenience to Culture: How Streaming Will Shape Entertainment in Nigeria in 2026

Published

3 days ago

16/01/2026

Business Post Contributor

Not too long ago, streaming in Nigeria was seen as a convenience, an alternative to traditional television, used mostly to catch up on missed shows or explore international content. Today, it has evolved into something far more ingrained. Streaming is now a culture: a daily habit that shapes conversations, influences pop culture, drives fandoms and even dictates how stories are told.

From late-night binge sessions and group watch parties to live-tweeting reality shows and football matches, streaming has become woven into how Nigerians experience entertainment. As mobile devices, smart TVs and affordable data options continue to expand access, the platform has moved from the fringes to the centre of everyday life. In 2026, this cultural shift will become even more pronounced.

Here’s what to expect as streaming continues to evolve in Nigeria and across Africa.

Value Will Define Loyalty in an Overcrowded Streaming Market: As streaming becomes mainstream, Nigerian audiences are becoming more discerning. Subscription fatigue is real, and users are no longer impressed by platforms with limited libraries or infrequent updates.

In 2026, loyalty will belong to platforms that offer sustained value, not just headline titles. This means:

Deep content libraries that go beyond a handful of popular shows
A healthy mix of live TV, sports and on-demand entertainment
Regular content refreshes that keep audiences engaged month after month
Viewers now understand value, and they will gravitate towards platforms that consistently deliver variety and relevance.

Local Stories Will Drive Cultural Relevance: Streaming has amplified the power of Nigerian storytelling, giving local productions the scale and visibility once reserved for traditional TV. Viewers are showing a clear preference for stories that feel familiar, authentic and culturally grounded.

In Nigeria, titles like Omera, Glass House, Italo, The Real Housewives of Lagos, Nigerian Idol and Big Brother Naija have become shared cultural moments, driving online conversations and real-world buzz. These shows are not just being watched; they are being experienced.

Across the continent, similar patterns are emerging, reinforcing the role of hyperlocal content in building loyalty and identity. In 2026, investment in African creators will remain central to streaming growth.

Streaming Becomes Personal and Predictive: As streaming matures, platforms will increasingly rely on AI to understand viewers on a deeper level. In 2026, Nigerian users can expect:

More intuitive recommendations tailored to individual tastes
Smarter content discovery that reduces the time spent searching
Interactive experiences that respond to viewer behaviour

Beyond content, AI will also enhance advertising relevance and customer support, creating a smoother, more personalised user journey.

Live Sports Will Continue to Anchor Streaming Culture: While binge-worthy series drive daily engagement, live sports remain one of streaming’s biggest cultural anchors. Football, in particular, continues to command passionate followership in Nigeria.

With the 2026 FIFA World Cup scheduled for June–July, live streaming will dominate viewing behaviour once domestic leagues conclude. Nigerian football fans demand quality, reliability and immediacy, making official platforms with full broadcast rights, such as SuperSport, essential destinations during major tournaments.

In 2026, sports will further reinforce the value of legitimate, high-quality streaming experiences.

Security Becomes Non-Negotiable: As streaming cements its cultural relevance, content protection will take on greater importance. Premium sports and entertainment remain prime targets for piracy, but the response is becoming more sophisticated.

Technologies from cybersecurity firms like Irdeto now enable real-time monitoring, rapid takedowns and legal action against illicit streaming networks. These measures protect not just platforms, but creators and the broader creative ecosystem, a critical consideration as local production continues to grow.

Innovation Makes Streaming More Inclusive: One of the most significant shifts in Nigeria’s streaming landscape is how inclusive it has become. Platforms are innovating around:

Flexible pricing
Bundled services that combine TV and streaming
Multi-device access, including mobile-first options

Whether premium or entry-level, users can now find options that suit their lifestyle and budget, reinforcing streaming’s position as an everyday entertainment staple.

A More Conscious Streaming Audience Emerges: As streaming culture matures, so does audience awareness. Nigerian viewers are increasingly able to identify illegal streaming platforms and understand the long-term damage piracy causes to the industry.

In 2026, conscious viewing will continue to gain ground, with users learning to avoid red flags such as “free” premium streams, unofficial apps, VPN-only access and excessive pop-up advertising.

Streaming is no longer simply about watching content, it is about belonging to moments, communities and conversations. In Nigeria, it has evolved into a cultural force that shapes how stories are told, shared and celebrated.

As 2026 unfolds, streaming will continue to thrive at the intersection of technology, culture and creativity, offering entertainment that is accessible, relevant and deeply local.

Feature/OPED

How Compliance through Technology among Banks can Promote Intra-Africa Trade

Published

3 days ago

16/01/2026

Business Post Contributor

By Anne Mureithi

Provision of banking services in Africa continues to undergo profound digital transformation where most transactions are conducted virtually via digital devices and cash moved electronically. Mobile banking, fintech innovation, and cross-border digital payments have reshaped how individuals and businesses consume financial services.

In Nigeria and across the continent face, banks face sharp scrutiny from expanding regulatory landscape, including Anti-Money Laundering (AML), combating the financing of terrorism (CFT) and combating the financing of proliferation (CPF) that involves disrupting funds for weapons of mass destruction (WMD) through targeted financial sanctions.

With increased cross border trade, everyone including governments look upon banks to provide Know Your Customer (KYC) services, fraud risk management, and increasingly adhere to stringent data protection and privacy regulations as well as Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) reporting standards.

Compliance is no longer a back-office obligation, and this calls for increased investments in technology, particularly Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) to enable banks to meet compliance requirements.

This is important as local traders want a banking partner who offers one-stop shop services on compliance matters. For banks, this is a competitive advantage, a core capability, and a source of differentiation. By embedding compliance into product and process design, banks can meet regulatory obligations efficiently while fostering innovation through a compliance-by-design approach.

In March 2025, the Central Bank of Kenya published the results of a survey on AI adoption in the banking sector, revealing moderate uptake, with 50% of respondents indicating some level of implementation. The survey found that among institutions that had adopted AI and machine learning, the leading applications were credit risk assessment (65%), cybersecurity (54%) and customer service (43%), followed by e-KYC (41%) and fraud risk management (40%).

These findings underscore significant untapped potential for AI to transform customer experience and strengthen risk management, particularly in AML and compliance monitoring. As intra-Africa trade continues to increase, compliance teams within banks must play a leading role in establishing strong governance, ensuring transparency, and preparing institutions for emerging regulatory expectations.

The Central Bank of Kenya has confirmed that it is in the final stages of developing a Guidance Note on Artificial Intelligence, with 95% of surveyed institutions having requested formal regulatory direction. The anticipated principles-based framework will focus on governance, risk management, transparency, and the ethical use of AI, laying the foundation for responsible innovation in the financial sector.

AI and ML models offer practical solutions to compliance challenges by learning and tracking typical behavioural patterns by customer, product, and corridor, flagging anomalies such as unusual counterparties, transaction values, or routing patterns in cross-border flows. These tools can also generate more accurate and complete assessments of ongoing customer due diligence and customer risk, which can be updated to account for new and emerging threats in real time.

By detecting potential violations of normal customer profiles in data or groups of customers with higher-risk characteristics, AI has streamlined priorities towards high-risk cases and reduced the time spent on false positives. This capability is increasingly critical as transaction volumes and complexity grow. Such technological advances transform compliance from a costly obligation into a strategic advantage.

Customers do not need to know one another to execute a transaction since AI-powered identity authenticates customer identity through document scanning, biometric verification and mobile-based identity solutions. These solutions have also enabled banks to onboard new customers remotely without the need to visit a physical bank to fill in registration details.

Accounts are fully secure and only users who pass the mobile-based identity verification are allowed access thereby preventing fraud. This also supports financial inclusion by enabling access to financial services for individuals who struggle to provide adequate identification documents for opening bank accounts.

In addition, Regulatory Technology (RegTech) solutions enable financial institutions to monitor regulatory developments, map obligations across their operations, conduct initial gap assessments, ensure that policies and procedures are always up to date and streamline regulatory reporting.

This capability is particularly valuable for pan-African institutions in ensuring agility while responding to regulatory changes across multiple jurisdictions. With its presence in 34 African countries, Ecobank advocates for harmonised payment systems and regulatory frameworks as a catalyst for accelerating intra-African trade.

Regional regulatory alignment further amplifies these gains. As African regulators work towards greater harmonisation of standards, banks with pan-African footprints are uniquely positioned to bridge local realities with global expectations, enabling smoother cross-border transactions and reducing friction for businesses operating across multiple markets.

The convergence of digital innovation and regulation presents an opportunity to support regional integration and strengthen public confidence. Banks that integrate compliance into their digital strategies, invest in ethical AI, enforce strong governance, and actively engage regulators will be best positioned to compete, facilitate trade, and protect financial integrity.

On an Africa-wide platform, traders from Nigeria want a synchronised platform that provides them with end-to-end solutions. Say Ecobank Group’s AML monitoring and sanctions screening capabilities within its SWIFT payment infrastructure ensure that all cross-border payment messages undergo real-time compliance checks prior to fund settlement.

With increased intra-Africa trade that rides on online platforms, accelerated digitalisation of cross-border transactions, timely, efficient, and secure payment processing is paramount. Real-time compliance monitoring is a non-negotiable cornerstone of safeguarding the integrity of international payment flows.

Ultimately, the future of banking in Africa will be defined by how institutions harness technology to meet regulatory obligations, deter financial crime, and foster trust among businesses, consumers, and public institutions alike. Compliance is no longer a constraint on growth; it is a foundation for sustainable innovation, regional integration, and long-term confidence in Africa’s financial system.

Ms Mureithi is a director in charge of compliance at Ecobank, Central, Eastern and Southern Africa (CESA)