CORAM

PARTIES

INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORALCOMMISSION (INEC)  APPELLANTS

CHIEF FELIX ONOWAKPOKO

RESPONDENTS 

AREA(S) OF LAW

None

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Respondents as Plaintiff commenced an action at the Federal High Court, Warri, against the Appellant as Defendant wherein that contended that their Isoko North State Constituency existed until it was suppressed by the Civil Rule (Political Programme) Decree No.1, 1996. That the Appellant, Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had since 1999 consistently refused to acknowledge the existence of the constituency for the purpose of conducting elections to elect a member representing the constituency into the Delta Sate House of Assembly. And consequently, that the Delta State House of Assembly because no election has been conducted in the suppressed constituencies in the State, has not been properly constituted, as required by Section 91 of the 1999 Constitution. It was averred that the Delta Sate House of Assembly has only 29 members instead of 30 members and that Delta State with 10 Federal Constituencies should have a minimum of 30 members. The Defendant invoked the provisions of section 2(a) of the Public Officers (Protection) Act, 2004 and raised a preliminary objection that the suit was statute barred. The trial court overruled the objection and held that the act of suppressing the constituency could not be said to have been closed or ceased, but one to be seen as a continuing injury and consequently dismissed the preliminary objection. The Defendant’s/Appellant’s appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed, hence a further appeal to this court.

HELD

Appeal Allowed

ISSUES

?    Whether the appellant is not protected by Section 2 (a) of the Public Officers Protection Act Cap P 41 of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 having regard to the circumstances of this case?    Whether the Court of Appeal was right in the circumstances of this case in holding that there is no further need, nor is it necessary for the appellant restoring the suppressed constituency to resort to Section115of the Constitution dealing with the alteration of state constituency boundaries in accordance with Section 114 of the Constitution?    Whether the Court of Appeal w as right in relying on its judgment in the case of Oju Local Government V. INEC (2007) 14 NWLR (Pt. 1054) 242 having regard to the circumstance of this case?    Whether the Court of Appeal w as right on ascribing probative values to Exhibits 3, 4, and 5 and in holding that the constituency under consideration had been in existence along with other constituencies with election held therein prior to the year 1999 when appellant excised the respondent and refused to conduct elections into the constituency

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended)Public Officers Protection Act Cap. P. 41, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT