CORAM

---

---

PARTIES

---

OKOCHA SAMUEL OSI APPELLANTS

---

ACCORD PARTYNWAOBI EMEKA EMMANUELPEOPLES DEMOCRATIC PARTY (PDP) INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION (INEC) RESPONDENTS

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellant was the 1st Respondent’s candidate, while the 2nd Respondent was the 3rd Respondent’s candidate and both contested the elections held on 11/3/15 for the Aniocha North Constituency in the Delta State House of Assembly. The Appellant won that election and was so declared by the 4th Respondent. The 2nd Respondent quickly filed a petition at the National and State Houses of Assembly Election Tribunal challenging the Appellant’s election which petition was dismissed. Dissatisfied with the judgment of the Tribunal, the 2nd Respondent and his Party, the 3rd Respondent filed an appeal to the Court of Appeal which upturned the decision of the Tribunal by declaring that the declaration and return of the Appellant and 1st Respondent was invalid, null and void and instead it declared the 2nd Respondent winner of the election and as member of the Delta State Constituency. The Appellant herein appealed to this Court. The 2nd and 3rd Respondents filed a preliminary objection on jurisdiction arguing that the Court of Appeal is the final Court to entertain and determine appeals from election petition Tribunal on National and State Assembly Election petitions hence that this Court lacks Jurisdiction to entertain this appeal by virtue of the provisions of Section 246 (3) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

---

HELD

---

Preliminary Objection Sustained, Appeal Struck Out

---

ISSUES

---

Preliminary Objection Whether the appellants appeal is not incompetent, an abuse of judicial process and vests no jurisdiction in the Supreme Court

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

ISSUE OF JURISDICTION – FUNDAMENTAL NATURE OF THE ISSUE OF JURISDICTION

---

“Issue of jurisdiction is very fundamental and is life wire of every matter requiring adjudication which when raised, the Court MUST ensure that it deals with it one way or the other. This is because any proceedings or appeal made or heard without Jurisdiction, no matter how well conducted is invalid, null, void and of no substance as it touches the competence of the Court.”

---

JURISDICTION – IMPORTANCE OF JURISDICTION

---

“My noble Lords, permit me to, at this stage, emphasize the importance of jurisdiction of Court in any matter/appeal. Jurisdiction is said to be a threshold issue which is of paramount importance and therefore when raised at any stage, the Court before which it was raised MUST mandatorily look at it at the earliest stage or opportunity and determine whether it has jurisdiction or not. This is moreso because any proceeding conducted without jurisdiction, no matter how well or admirably conducted, is a nullity. See Eluabe v. Omokri (2004) 11-12 SC 60. Before a Court can assume Jurisdiction on a matter or appeal it must be satisfied that the following conditions are met or satisfied, namely:
(i) That it is properly constituted regarding the number and qualification of its member as the case may be.
(ii) That the subject matter of the action or appeal is within its Jurisdiction as governed or donated to it by Law.
(iii) That the action or appeal is initiated by due process of Law; and,
(iv) Any condition precedent to the exercise of its Jurisdiction must be fulfilled or met.
See Madukolu v. Nkemdilim (ALL NLR 687); Dagana Anor v. Usman & 4 Ors (2012)2 SC (pt III) NURTW & Anor v. RTEAN & Ors (2012) 1 SC (pt I) 119.

---

JURISDICTION OF COURT – WHETHER JURISDICTION CAN BE CONFERRED ON THE COURT BY CONSENT OF PARTIES

---

“It needs to be stressed here however, that Jurisdiction is generally a creature of Statutes, Constitution or otherwise jurisdiction to conduct cases/appeals are donated or conferred by Statutes or the Constitution. Failure to comply with any statutory or constitution provisions or the requirement prescribed by the relevant law order which an appeal may be competent and properly brought before the Court, will deprive such appellate Court of Jurisdiction to adjudicate on the appeal. See AG Lagos State v. AG of Federation (2014) 9 NWLR (pt 1412) 217-254; Tiza v. Begha (2006) 6 SC (pt11) 1 page 1. It goes without saying therefore, that no Court has the power to confer or donate Jurisdiction to itself. It must act within the preview or confines of the law. Similarly, jurisdiction can not be conferred on the Court by the parties or by consent of the parties. Jurisdiction of the Court is conferred, and can not be circumvented. lt is always governed by the Constitution or Statute creating it. See Galadima v. Tambai (2000)6 SC (pt 1)196 (2000)11 NWLR (pt 677) 1; African Newspapers of Nigeria v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (1985)2 NWLR (pt 6) 137.”

---

DECISIONS OF THE COURT OF APPEAL IN RESPECT OF APPEALS FROM THE NATIONAL AND STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY ELECTION PETITION TRIBUNAL -WHETHER DECISIONS OF COURT OF APPEAL IN RESPECT OF APPEALS FROM THE NATIONAL AND STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY ELECTION PETITION TRIBUNAL ARE FINAL

---

“Now let us see below whether this Court has that Jurisdiction to grant the relief sought by the appellant herein, Section 246 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) provides thus:-
“Section 246 reads:
(1) An appeal to the Court of Appeal shall lie as of right from-
(a) decisions of Code of Conduct Tribunals established in the Fifth Schedule to this Constitution;
(b) decisions of the National and State House of Assembly Election Tribunals; and
(c) decisions of the Governorship Election tribunals, on any question as to whether
(i) any person has been validly elected as a member of the National Assembly of a State under this Constitution;
(ii)any person has been validly elected to the office of a Governor or Deputy Governor; or
(iii) the term of office of any person has ceased or the seat of any such person has become vacant,
(2) The National Assembly may confer Jurisdiction upon the Court of Appeal to hear and determine appeals from any decision of any other Court of law or Tribunal established by the National Assembly.
(3) The decisions of the Court of Appeal in respect of appeals arising from the National and State House of Assembly election petitions shall be final.”
A cursory look at the above quoted constitutional provisions shows that the decisions of Court of Appeal in respect of appeals from the National and State House of Assembly Election petition Tribunal shall be final. There is no doubt that the application the appellant filed before the lower Court as stems from the decision the election petition which went on appeal to the lower Court. The lower Court determined that appeal and gave its final judgment defaming finally the right of the parties on that appeal. By the provisions of Section 246 (3) of the 1999 Constitution as amended that decision has flair of finality.”

---

APPEALS FROM THE NATIONAL AND STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY ELECTION PETITION TRIBUNAL – WHETHER THE SUPREME COURT HAS JURISDICTION TO ENTERTAIN APPEALS FROM THE NATIONAL AND STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY ELECTION PETITION TRIBUNAL

---

“This Court was opportuned to expatiate on a provision similar to Section 246(3) of the 1999 Constitution on the case of Rev. Hyde Onwuaguluchi V. Mr Ben Cowns Ndu (2001)7 NWLR(pt. 712)309 where this Court states thus:-
“Where an appeal is actually in respect of National Assembly election or other relevant election as this case, the State House of Assembly Election whatever errors of procedural nature or of procedural vice as to jurisdiction or competency cannot be corrected by this Court they can only be corrected by the Court of Appeal itself or since it has no appellate or supervisory Jurisdiction over the Court of Appeal in such circumstances. This Court will not permit or encourage any subterfuge under which it may assume Jurisdiction to hear an appeal in respect of which the Constitution has in clear and unambiguous terms made the Court of Appeal the final Court. lt follows that an appeal in respect of a decision by the Court of Appeal can be taken on appeal to the Supreme Court, but is final for all purposes”
This Court in the same case also stated as below per Uwai for JSC:
“lt must be emphasized that such finality applies to every interlocutory decision or decision taken in respect of a matter or on issues concerning or arising from the decision reached in the appeal. No appeal shall lie from it to any other Court. The word trial” in this regard means that the journey of the case is concluded, terminated, completed and is without further appeal. The intention of the said decree is to make the Court of Appeal the Court of last resort in matters pertaining to election to the National Assembly. A proper address to the Court of Appeal in such matter to set aside its decision when refused is treated exactly like the decision in the appeal it is not appealable, it is final.”
I must add here that the wordings of the provisions of Section 246 (3) of the 1999 Constitution as amended are plain, clear and unambiguous which also must be given their natural and ordinary meaning. They allow no room of manipulation or circumvention in keeping with the tends of interpretation of Statutes. The only valid and applicable interpretation to be given to the constitutional provisions is that the Court of Appeal is final bus stop or destination in election matters relating to National or State Assembly election like in this instant appeal.
This Court in multiplicity of its decided authorities consistently interpreted the provisions of Section 246 (3) of the 1999 Constitution as amended to mean that the Court of Appeal is the final Court to hear and determine appeals in election petitions for membership of National or State Assembly from the relevant Tribunal. For instance, this Court in case of Salim v. Idris (2014) 19 NWLR (pt. 1429) 36; Jegede v. Akande (2012) 16 NWLR (pt. 1482) 43 at 72, Okadigbo v. Emeka & Ors (Supra) had emphasized that this Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain, hear or determine such appeals, see also Opara v. Awadi (2013) 12 NWLR (pt. 1369) 572 at 532. Madumaze v. Okwara (2013) 12 NWLR (pt. 1368) 303 at 334/335; Legwa v. Lekwawa (2010) 19 NWLR (pt. 1226) 26 at 38/39; Apostle Selede v. Chief Nelson Gbe & Ors (1988) 5 NWLR (pt. 93) 134 at 136; Emordi v. Igbeke (2011) 4 sc (pt. II) 107. Also of recent, in Dangame v. Usman (supra) this Court also had this to say:-
“So long the starting point of the litigation is the Election Tribunal then at the Court of Appeal, once the subject matter is National Assembly or State Assembly seat. lt terminates there, a purported appeal can not therefore find its way to this Court because of a feature or anything resembling issues that could be dealt with at the State High Court or Federal High Court could not give it another passport or Visa to this Court.”

---

ELECTION PETITIONS – FINALITY OF THE DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEAL IN RESPECT OF APPEAL ARISING FROM THE NATIONAL AND STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY ELECTION PETITIONS

---

“The purported appeal certainly arises from the judgment of the Court of Appeal in respect of appeals from the National and State Houses of Assembly Election. By virtue of Section 246(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) the Court of Appeal’s decision in such matters are final. See Emordi v. Igbeke (2011) 4 SC (Pt. 11) 107 and Madumere v. Okwara (2013) 6-7 SC (Pt 2) 95.”

---

ELECTION PETITIONS – IMPORT OF SECTIONS 246(3) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA 1999 ON THE FINALITY OF THE DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEAL IN RESPECT OF APPEALS ARISING FROM THE NATIONAL AND STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY ELECTION PETITIONS

---

“The Law is very clear as provided by Sections 246(3) of the Constitution 1999 that the nature of the subject matter at hand has its final determination at the Court of Appeal. The Section states as follows:-
“246(3) The decision of the Court of Appeal in respect of appeal arising from the National and State House of Assembly election petitions shall be final.”

---

APPEALS FROM THE NATIONAL AND STATE HOUSES OF ASSEMBLY ELECTION TRIBUNALS – FINALITY OF THE DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEAL IN RESPECT OF APPEAL ARISING FROM THE NATIONAL AND STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY ELECTION PETITIONS

---

“As demonstrated in the leading judgment, Section 246(3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) confers finality on the judgment of the Court of Appeal in respect of appeals from the National and State Houses of Assembly Election Tribunals. Case Law has dealt with this question and so, it should not delay us further. Opara and Anor v. Amadi (2013) 6-7 SC (pt. 2) 49; Madumere v. Okwara (2013) 6 SC (pt. 2) 95; Okadigbo v. Emeka and Anor (2012) LPELR 7839 (SC) 17; Emordi v. Igbeke (2011) 4 SC (pt. 11) 107, 145; Salik v. Idris (2014) 15 NWLR (pt. 1429) 36; Dangana v. Usman(2012) LPELR-7827 (SC).”

---

CASES CITED

---

Not Available

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended)|Electoral Act 2010|Supreme Court Act 2004|

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT