USENI V. ATTA & ORS
March 19, 2025OSOH V. APC & ORS
March 19, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2023-01) Legalpedia 17020 (SC)
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Holden at Abuja
Fri Jan 27, 2023
Suit Number: SC.CV/1525/2022
CORAM
JOHN INYANG OKORO
IBRAHIM MOHAMMED MUSA SAULAWA
ADAMU JAURO
TIJJANI ABUBAKAR
EMMANUEL AKOMAYE AGIM
PARTIES
HON. GARBA CHEDE HAMMANJULDE
APPELLANTS
1. HON. ABDULSALAM GAMBO MUBARAK
2. ALL PROGRESSIVES CONGRESS (APC)
3. INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
APPEAL, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE, JUDGEMENT, ELECTION PETITION, EVIDENCE
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Appellant and 1st Respondent are members of the same political party (2nd Respondent). Both of them were candidates for the BALI/GASSOL Federal Constituency Taraba State.
The 2nd Respondent conducted primary elections where he was returned and declared winner while the Appellant was waiting for primary elections to be conducted.
The trial court passed judgment in favor of the Appellant and agreed that indeed the purported primary election was a sham. The 1st Respondent was dissatisfied and appealed the decision. The Court of Appeal allowed the Appeal and ordered that his name be returned as winner and the candidate of the 2nd Respondent (APC) for in the forthcoming 2023 general election.
The instant appeal is a fall-out of the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Yola Judicial Division.
HELD
Appeal Allowed
ISSUES
Whether the appellant succeeded in proving his case that the 2nd respondent failed to conduct a primary election in respect of bali/gassol federal constituency on may 27th, 2022 or at any other date.
Whether the failure of the 2nd respondent political party to comply with the mandatory provisions of section 82 of the electoral act will not vitiate the primary election conducted in breach thereof.
Whether the court below was right in reversing the decision of the federal high court, jalingo which granted consequential reliefs to the plaintiff/appellant.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
APC PRIMARY ELECTIONS – MEMBERSHIP AND DUTIES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ELECTION COMMITTEE
It is trite, that the powers of the National Working Committee (NWC) of the 2nd Respondent to appoint members into committees for the purpose of conducting primary elections are not at large. The Guidelines FOR THE NOMINATION OF CANDIDATES FOR THE 2023 GENERAL ELECTIONS (Exhibit APC 1B) have clearly provided in paragraph 15 thus:
“15. ELECTORAL COMMITTEES
(c) There shall be a 5-Member Legislative Election Committee (State House of Assembly, House of Representative and Senate) for each State of the Federation and FCT. They will be recruited, from outside of their State for their assignment, and shall comprise of a Chairman, Secretary and 3 other Members. They shall be responsible for the overall conduct of the exercise in the State and FCT,
(d) The membership of the various Electoral Committees shall be as constituted by the National Working Committee (acting on behalf of NEC)”
Duties of the Committee shall include:
Verification/Accreditation of Delegates
Organising and conducting Elections and all duties related to. The Electoral Committee shall serve as Electoral Officers/Returning Officers for each election. They shall supervise the conduct and submit same to the National Secretariat. They shall have powers to announce the outcome of all elections conducted.
The Electoral Committee shall appoint returning officers from amongst themselves and shall have the power to appoint a Returning Officer to supervise areas where they cannot cover, and such Returning Officer shall not be from that Constituency/Senatorial District/State.”
Undoubtedly, the provision of paragraph 15 of the 2nd Respondent’s Guidelines (Supra) are clear and unequivocal. Thus, they must be literally construed. The word “shall” couched in paragraph 15 of the 2nd Respondent’s Guidelines depicts a command and thus mandatory. See ECOBANK (NIG.) LTD VS HONEYWELL FLOUR MILLS PLC. (2019)2 NWLR (Pt. 1655)55 @ 83 paragraphs G – H, 84 paragraph E,DIRECTOR SSS VS. AGBAKOBA (1993) 3 NWLR (Pt. 595) 425; (1993) 3SC 77.
The duties and responsibilities imposed by the said paragraph 15 of the Guidelines of the 2nd Respondent are mandatory, thus cannot by any stretch of imagination be delegated to any other person or group. See BAMGBOYE VS. UNIVERSITY OF ILORIN(1999) 10 NWLR (Pt. 623) 29. – I. M. M. Saulawa JSC
ALTERNATIVE ISSUES – CONDUCT OF THE COURT
It is instructive, that the second issue has been raised by the Appellant as an alternative to the first issue….
Thus, having now resolved the first issue in the Appellant’s favour, there’s no gainsaying that the second issue has become spent, nugatory and rather academic. Accordingly, the said issue 2 is liable to be summarily struck out for being spent and academic. See ODEDO VS. INEC (2008), 17 NWLR (Pt 1117 – 554. – I. M. M. Saulawa JSC
CONSEQUENTIAL ORDER – MEANING
The term “consequential order” invariably denotes an order that accords meaning and effect to the decision (judgment) of the Court. A consequential order naturally flows from the judgment or decision of the Court. It is not merely given to a party as a matter of course. Thus, being an offshoot of the main claim in the action, a consequential order must owe its existence to the reliefs sought by the complainant.
See NOEKOER VS. EXECUTIVE GOVERNOR OF PLATEAU STATE (2018) 18 NWLR (Pt. 1646) 481. – I. M. M. Saulawa, JSC
ACADEMIC EXERCISE – MEANING
The law is trite that the Courts of law are devoid of competence to engage in sheer academic exercises. An academic question or issue characteristically does not require any answer or determination by a Court of law because it’s merely theoretical, speculative, hypothetical, or not in question.
See ODEDO VS. INEC (2008) 17 NWLR (Pt. 554) 666, PLATEAU STATE VS. AG FEDERATION (2006) 3 NWLR (Pt. 967) 346, HON BIMBO ADEPOJU VS. CHAIRMAN UNPP, OYO STATE (2012) 1 SCM 38 @ 51, BADEJO VS. FEDERAL MINISTRY OF EDUCATION (1996) 8 NWLR (Pt. 464).
JUDGMENTS – CONDUCT OF COURT
It is a well-settled doctrine, supported by a plethora of formidable authorities, that courts are under an onerous duty to deliver judgments that reasonably flow from the decisions or orders made on issues that are germane to the action before the court.
See APC VS. KARFI (2018) 6 NWLR (Pt 1616) 479, MODIBBO VS. USMAN (2020) 3 NWLR (Pt. 1712) 470 @ 521 paragraph A – C.– I. M. M. Saulawa JSC
CASES CITED
STATUTES REFERRED TO
APC Guidelines for the nomination of candidates for the 2023 General Elections
