HON. MUYIWA INAKOJU (IBADAN SOUTH EAST) & ORS V HON. ABRAHAM ADEOLU ADELEKE & ORS

CORAM

JOSEPH SHAGBAOR IKYEGH, JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

PARTIES

1. HON. MUYIWA INAKOJU (IBADAN SOUTH EAST)

2. HON. FAJIMI SAKIRULAHI ADEKUNLE (IBADAN SOUTH EAST)

3. HON. FASHOLA EMMANUEL OLUBOWALE (IBADAN NORTH EAST)

4. HON. SALAWU KEHINDE (IBADAN NORTH EAST)

5.HON. AYILARA KAZEEM (IBADAN SOUTH EAST)

6. HON. ABIOLA AYORINDE (IBADAN SOUTH EAST)

7. HON. AKINRINDE OYEWALE (AKINYELE II)

8. HON. JELILI ADELEKE (AKINYELE I)

9. HON. ISIAKA ADEOLA (IDO)

10. HON. LEKAN GANIYU (OLUYOLE)

11. HON. OGUNREMI MUFUTAU (ONA ARA)

12. HON. LAWAL DAUDA ADEMOLA (LAGELU)

13. HON. TAIWO OLUYEMI (IBARAPA)

14. HON. OLU OYELEYE (OGBOMOSO NORTH)

15. HON. AJADI OLATEJU (OGBOMOSO SOUTH)

16. HON. ESUOLA HAMED BABATUNDE (ATIBA)

17. HON. ATILOLA MORUFU OLAWALE (OYO EAST/WEST)

18. HON. AKANBI IDOWU (ORIRE) .

APPELLANTS

HON. ABRAHAM ADEOLU ADELEKE & ORS RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellants, who were members of the Oyo State House of Assembly, raised a notice of allegations of gross misconduct against the 3rd respondent without the involvement of the 1st and 2nd respondents who are the Speaker and Deputy Speaker respectively. The 1st and 2nd respondents reacted to the action by commencing an action by Originating Summons against the appellants upon service of the processes on them, the Appellants filed their notice of preliminary objection and the learned trial judge upheld the preliminary objection of the defendants.

HELD

The Court held by majority of 6:1 that the invocation of section 16 of the Court of Appeal Act was rightly done and that the section indeed confers powers on the Court of Appeal to hear matters brought to it on appeal on the merit where the High Court had jurisdiction over the matter.

ISSUES

1. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in its decision that section 188 of the 1999 Constitution did not oust the jurisdiction of the trial High Court.

2. Whether the Court of Appeal was right to determine the matter on its merits as per the claim of the Respondents in their originating summons pursuant to the powers vested in that court under and by virtue of section 16 of the Court of Appeal Act.?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

JURISDICTION-HOW DETERMINED

“In the determination of the issue of jurisdiction, the court should not be influenced by sympathy for the case of one of the parties but must base its decision on the law, particularly in the light of the enabling law. After all, jurisdiction is a matter of hard law.” Per NIKI TOBI, JSC.

NATURE OF “IMPEACHMENT”

“Impeachment and related proceedings are purely political matters over which this court cannot intervene.” Per DAHIRU MUSDAPHER, JSC.

CASES CITED

1. The Attorney-General of Anambra State v. The Attorney-General of the Federation (1993) 6 NWLR (Pt. 302) 6922. Attorney-General v. Okeke (2002) 12 NWLR (Pt. 782) 575, (2002) 10 SCM, 1