Legalpedia Citation: (2014) Legalpedia (CA) 76071
In the Court of Appeal
HOLDEN AT ENUGU
Fri Feb 14, 2014
Suit Number: CA/E/127/2012
CORAM
PARTIES
HON. NWALI ALPHONSUS CHINEDU APPELLANTS
1. INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION (INEC)
2. OKWURU TOBIAS CHUKWUEMEKA
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Appellant as Plaintiff in the Federal High Court holden at Abakaliki, Ebonyi State initiated this action by virtue of an originating summons praying the court for these reliefs inter alia: a declaration that the 2nd Defendant was not qualified to contest the April 9th 2011 National Assembly General Election for Ezza South/Ikwo Federal Constituency in Ebonyi State as he made a false declaration/information to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) by declaring in INEC Form CF 001 that he obtained a B.S.C. degree Certificate in 2006 from Imo State University which information is false; a declaration that 2nd Defendant did not graduate nor obtained a BSc Degree Certificate from Imo State University in 2006, and that the BSC Degree Certificate in Government/Public Administration purportedly obtained by 2nd Defendant thereby was forged; an Order of court disqualifying the 2nd Defendant as a candidate in the April 9th 2011 House of Representative General Election in compliance with S. 31(6) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as Amended) and S. 66(1)(h) of Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, (2011)(as Amended); an Order directing INEC to withdraw the Certificate of Return issued to the 2nd Defendant , the 2nd Defendant having contested the said election in contravention of S. 31 (6) of the Electoral Act, and S. 66 (1)(h) of the Constitution(aforementioned).The Appellant also filed an affidavit together with a written address in support thereof. The 1st Respondent did not file any process in opposition to the originating summons. The 2nd Respondent however, filed a counter-affidavit in opposition to the originating summons. After Parties adopted their respective addresses in the case, the learned trial judge in his ruling held that the matter before the court was completely a pre-election matter that was wrongfully brought after the election. The election having been conducted already, the court ceased to have jurisdiction to adjudicate on same unless such matter was filed before the election actually held.The trial court also held that approaching that court with such application after the elections was tantamount to indolence on the part of the applicant and consequently, dismissed the application. Dissatisfied with the decision of the lower court, the Appellant lodged this appeal at the Court of Appeal.
HELD
Appeal Allowed.
ISSUES
1. Whether the lower court was right to have raised and relied on a point of law, suo motu and not giving the parties the opportunities to address it on the point, before dismissing this application for lack of jurisdiction.?
2. Whether in the circumstances of this case, the Federal High Court has the jurisdiction to entertain this application.?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CASES CITED
STATUTES REFERRED TO
1. Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999
2. Court of Appeal Rules, 2011