By the provision of Section 36(1)(5) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), every accused is entitled to the right to fair hearing and to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in accordance with procedure permitted by law. In a complementary manner to the Constitution, the administration of criminal justice Act, 2015 of the Country, provides for host of procedures which shall be complied with by the police in criminal investigation. One such provision is Section 6, 15(3) and 17(2) of the Act which provides suspect with the right to silence until after consultation with a legal practitioner of his choice, members of the Legal Aid Council, and members of a Civil Society or other persons of his choice. The Act requires further that statement when volunteered, shall be video or audio recorded and shall be recorded in the presence of a counsel for the suspect or other persons of his choice without providing consequences for non-compliance. Instead, the evidence Act of the Country, 2011 provides for the admissibility of evidence improperly obtained where the same is relevant. In this paper, the writer using the doctrinal research method explores the question whether the legal regime on the admissibility of improperly obtained evidence under the Act, is inconsistent with the international standard on the right to fair hearing enshrined in the Constitution. In the final analysis, the writer makes recommendations for reform.