Nigeria is a federation and the rising profile of arbitration law and practice has brought to the fore questions regarding the validity of a substantive federal law on arbitration. The constitutional schematic of legislative competence between the National Assembly and the State Houses of Assembly has generated judicial discourse in other areas of the law which offer an insight into the proper interpretation of the relevant constitutional provisions. This article is a critique of the various arguments in favour of a substantive federal law on arbitration. It is argued, contrary to what appears to be conventional wisdom, that arbitration is a residual matter within the legislative competence of the State Houses of Assembly. The article also reviews the laudable provisions of the current Draft Federal Arbitration and Conciliation Bill proposed by the National Committee on the Reform and Harmonization of Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Laws in Nigeria against the background of the deficiencies in the current statutory regime under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1990 and the principles evolved by the courts.
Journal of International Arbitration