CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1       BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

1.2       STATEMENT OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM

1.3       RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1.3       AIM AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1.4       SCOPE OF THE STUDY

1.5       SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

1.6       RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

1.7       LITERATURE REVIEW

1.8       SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTERS

CHAPTER TWO

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE CUSTOMARY LAW AND REPUGNANCY DOCTRINE

2.1       Meaning of Customary Law

2.2       Law and Customs as Products of Social Processes

2.3       Characteristics of Nigerian Customary Law

2.4       Historical Background of Repugnancy Doctrine

2.5       Benefits of the Repugnancy Test 

CHAPTER THREE

OVERVIEW OF CUSTOMARY LAWS

3.1       EFFECT OF COLONIALISM ON CUSTOMARY LAWS IN NIGERIA

3.2       REASONS WHY CUSTOMARY LAW IS INFERIOR TO ENGLISH LAW

3.2.1    THE VALIDITY TEST 

3.2.1.1 REPUGNANCY TEST

3.2.1.2 INCOMPATIBILITY TEST

3.2.1.3 PUBLIC POLICY

3.3       RATIONALS TOR SUBJECTING CUSTOMARY LAW TO THE REPUGNANCY TEST 

3.4       EFFECT OF REPUGNANCY TEST ON CUSTOMARY LAWS

3.5       THE PLACE OF REPUGNANCY TEST ON NIGERIAN CUSTOMARY LAW

3.6       THE PLACE OF REPUGNANCY TEST IN CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE

CHAPTER FOUR

CONCLUSION, CONTRIBUTION TO KNOWLEDGE SUGGESTED AREA FOR FURTHER STUDIES

4.1       CONCLUSION

4.2       CONTRIBUTION TO KNOWLEDGE

4.3       SUGGESTED AREA FOR FURTHER STUDIES

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The doctrine of repugnancy owes it origin to the medieval period and evolution of English equity. The constitutional provisions of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 have been a useful reference points when there is a need to subject any custom to repugnancy test. However, there is still need to know why customary laws are inferior to English laws in Nigeria, even when we know that our customary law have been with us before the arrival of colonial masters. The focus of this study was on repugnancy doctrine; an attempt to destroy or preserve customary law. The study used analytical approach. The problem with our customary law is that it is inundated with multiplicity of customs complicated by superstitions. It is difficult to take judicial notice of it without conditionality. The essay concludes that repugnancy test no longer has a notable place in our Customary Criminal Law Jurisprudence, the repugnancy doctrine could be used as a veritable tool in shaping, or modernizing our Customary Criminal Rules into a more acceptable standard which may be enacted into laws by the legislative arms of the Local Governments as bye-laws which could be enforced by our Customary Courts of the area thereby obviating the provision of Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) which, as it stands does not recognize Customary Criminal Laws (because they are unwritten) and thereby makes the repugnancy test inapplicable in our Customary Criminal Law jurisprudence.