DIM CHUKWUEMEKA ODUMEGWU OJUKWU V. ALHAJI UMARU MUSA YAR’ADUA

CORAM

GEORGE ADESOLA OGUNTADE JSC (Dissenting), JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

WALTER SAMUEL NKANU ONNOGHEN JSC (Dissenting) JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

FRANCIS FEDODE TABAI JSC (Lead Judgment), JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

TANKO MUHAMMAD, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

PIUS OLAYIWOLA ADEREMI JSC (Dissenting), JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

PARTIES

DIM CHUKWUEMEKA ODUMEGWU OJUKWU APPELLANTS

ALHAJI UMARU MUSA YAR’ADUA

RESPONDENTS 

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant was the petitioner before the presidential election tribunal. The respondents filed preliminary objections challenging the petition. The court below upheld the preliminary objections and struck out the petition. The appellant has further appealed.

HELD

Appeal dismissed. In a majority decision of ratio 4:3 it was held that the striking out by the Court of Appeal did not result in a miscarriage of justice

ISSUES

1. Whether the Court of Appeal was right to hold that grounds 2 and 3 of the petition do not conform with or relate any of the 4 grounds set out in Section 145(1) of the Electoral Act 2006?

2. Whether the Court of Appeal was right to rely on Section 146 of the Electoral Act 2006 to strike out ground 1 of the petition after it had earlier held the said ground to be competent? and

3. Whether having held that ground 4 of the petition was competent, the Court of Appeal was right to consider its merit and strick it out?

4. Whether the approach adopted by the Court of Appeal in reaching its decision to strike out the petition has occasioned a miscarriage of justice?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CHALLENGING AN ELECTION ON THE GROUND OF NON-COMPLIANCE

A petitioner who challenges the election of a respondent on the ground of non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act must plead not just the fact of the alleged non-compliance, but must go a step further to plead that the non-compliance substantially affected the result of the election. Per Tabai, JSC

DEFECTIVE PETITION-HOW TREATED

A petition which on the face of it is defective or which in the face of the written statements on oath discloses no reasonable cause of action should be struck out on the application of the Respondent. Per Tabai, JSC

WHAT WILL MAKE AN ELECTION PETITION INCOMPETENT

If a respondent in an election petition feels strongly that, on the face of it, the petition is patently unsustainable in the sense that it does not meet the requirements of the Electoral Act or the First Schedule to the Act or that it is lacking in materials to sustain it and therefore incompetent, he is at liberty to raise it and timeously too. Per Tabai, JSC

PURPOSE OF PLEADINGS

The primary function of pleadings is to define and delimit with clarity and precision the real matters in controversy between the parties upon which they prepare and present their respective cases and upon which the court will be called to adjudicate between them. Per Tobi, JSC

CASES CITED

1. Jang v INEC  (2004) 12 N.W.L.R. (Part 886) 46 at 83(2004) 8 SCM, 46;

2. Akinbiu v Military Governor Ondo State (1990)3 N.W.L.R. (Part 140) 525 at 531.

3. In Shell-Bp Petroleum Development Co. of Nigeria Ltd & Ors v M.S. Onasanya (1976) 6SC 57 at 604. Atolaabe v. Shorun (1985) 4 SC (Pt. 1) 250

STATUTES REFERRED TO

1. Electoral Act 2006

2. Election Tribunal and Court Practice Directions

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT