ALHAJI ABDUL-RAUF OLUMEGBON V. AMIDA ADEDEJI KAREEM
June 18, 2025REMILEKUN OLAIYA V. MRS. CORNELIA T. OLAIYA
June 18, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2002) Legalpedia (SC) 41181
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri May 10, 2002
Suit Number: SC. 201/2000
CORAM
UMARUATU KALGO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
M.E. OGUNDARE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
U. MOHAMMED, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
O. OLATAWURA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
S.U. MOHAMMED – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
U.A. KALGO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
S.O. UWAIFO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
CHIEF GANI FAWEHINMI APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellant filed an application for mandamus to compel the police to investigate alleged criminal allegations made against Bola Tinubu, then Governor of Lagos state.
HELD
The court held that the police has power to so investigate but that the power is discretionary and that the applicant has no locus standi to file the application.
ISSUES
(1) Whether the Court of Appeal was right in refusing to make an order of mandamus on the respondents where the performance of specific public duty has been clearly found established against the respondents.(2) Whether the provisions of section 4 of the Police Act, Cap. 359, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990 allows for the exercise of discretion by the Police on whether or not to investigate allegations of crime.(3) Whether Governor Bola Ahmed Tinubu in particular and persons named in section 308(3) of the 1999 Constitution have no immunity against investigation under section 308 of 1999 Constitution (4) Whether the judgment of the Court of Appeal was right having affirmed that the lower court was correct in the meaning it ascribed to the word ‘otherwise’ in section 308(1)(b) and yet upheld that section 308 does not shield or protect the persons covered under section 308(3) from police investigation.(5) Whether the Court of Appeal was right in ruling that Governor Bola Tinubu could be investigated notwithstanding the ruling of the same Court of Appeal that Exhs. GF1, GF2 and GF3, which form the substratum of the appellant’s case, were inadmissible in evidence.(6) Whether the appellant has the locus standi to apply for writ of mandamus.”
RATIONES DECIDENDI
IMMUNITY AGAINST CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION – SECTION (308) OF THE 1999 CONSTITUTION CONSIDERED
Section 308 does not grant to the officers mentioned in subsection (308) thereof immunity from police investigation into allegations of crimes made against them. Investigation into a criminal complaint is not tantamount to instituting or bringing criminal proceedings- Uwaifo J.S.C
GRANT OF ORDER OF MANDAMUS – LOCUS STANDI OF PLAINTIFF
A person who seeks an order of mandamus must, among other things, show that he has a legal right to ensure the performance of a duty- Uwaifo J.S.C
GRANT OF ORDER OF MANDAMUS – CONSIDERATION OF
An applicant for the grant of the order must show that he has sufficient legal interest to protect and that he has demanded the performance of the public duty from those obliged to do so and was refused- Uwaifo J.S.C.
CASES CITED
Adejumo v. Adejumo (1989) 3 NWLR (pt.110) 417 at p.445; Okere v Nkem (1992) 4 NWLR (pt. 234) 132 at p.149; Commissioner for Local Government v. Kaderbhai (supra) at pp.660-661Fawehinmi v. Akilu (1987) 4 NWLR (pt.67) 797R. v. Lewisham Union Guardians (1897) 1 Q.B. 498;R. v. Leicester Guardians (1899) 2 Q.B. 632;R. v. Customs and Exercise Commissioners ex parte Cook (1970)1 WLR 450 at 455
STATUTES REFERRED TO
The 1999 ConstitutionThe police ActThe criminal procedure Act
