CHARLES UDEGBUNAM V FED. CAP. DEV. AUTHORITY
June 16, 2025THE STATE VS PROF. L.O. NWAOBOSHI & ORS
June 16, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2003) Legalpedia (SC) 40611
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri May 23, 2003
Suit Number: SC. 115/2002
CORAM
ALOYSIUS IYORGYER KASTSINA-ALU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
EMMANUEL OLAYINKA AYOOLA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
AUGUSTINE NNAMANI, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
1. THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA 2. THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE COMPLAINANT(S) /APPELLANT(S)
ACCUSED/RESPONDENT
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The respondent was convicted for fraudulently granting credit facilities by the Failed Banks Tribunal and the Special Appeals Tribunal. Having exhausted his avenue for appeal, he brought a fresh action in the Federal High Court claiming that his conviction for acts which did not constitute any offence at the time they were done was against his fundamental rights.
HELD
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the special courts had no jurisdiction in convicting the respondents for acts which did not constitute any offence at the time they were done. The Court ordered the High Court to deal with the matter in the light of this judgment.
ISSUES
(1)Were the learned justices of the Court of Appeal right in not striking out this case stated when ex-face the trial Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction to make the reference? (2) Whether the Court of Appeal was right in entertaining the reference when the condition precedent to the exercise of jurisdiction to refer by way of case stated by the Federal High Court had to the finding of the Court of Appeal not been fully established? (3) Was the Court of Appeal right in its application of the Supreme Court decision in 7-UP Bottling Co. Ltd V. Abiola & Sons Ltd (1995) 3 NWLR (pt. 383) 257 to the facts of this case and in its justification of the hearing ex parte of the motion on notice praying for the reference?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
JURISDICTION OF FEDERAL HIGH COURT IN ENFORCEMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
The jurisdiction of the Federal High Court to entertain the action does not depend on whether it was empowered, at the relevant time, to try offences with which the respondent was charged. What is important is the cause of action which he claims to have. If that cause of action comes within the ambit of the enforcement of any fundamental right contained in Chapter IV in the sense that the respondent alleges that any of the provisions of that Chapter has been, is being or likely to be contravened in relation to him, then the Federal High Court is eminently conferred with jurisdiction to entertain the action. Per Uwaifo JSC
JURISDICTION OF COURT TO DISTURB FINAL DECISIONS OF TRIBUNALS IN ORDER TO ENFORCE RIGHTS
The final decision of the Special Appeal Tribunal, an inferior court, cannot foreclose the enforcement of the constitutionally entrenched right of the respondent not to be convicted of an act which did not constitute an offence at the time it was committed. No court or tribunal has any jurisdiction to so convict; and cannot by ruling otherwise that is has jurisdiction, or by keeping quiet about it, confer jurisdiction on itself. That is what section 33(8) of the 1979 Constitution has guaranteed and it must have its full impact on the proceedings before the Failed Banks Tribunal. Per Uwaifo JSC
CONDITIONS FOR REFERENCE TO HIGHER COURT ON QUESTION OF LAW
It is clear from those cases that there are conditions which must exist before a reference can be made under this provision. First, the question must be as to the interpretation or application of the Constitution. It is the foundation for even contemplating making a reference… Second such a question must arise in the proceedings in connection with an issue before the court making the reference… Third, the matter for reference must involve a substantial question of law. The court making the reference must decide the substantiality of the question… Fourth, the court making the reference to the higher court is not required to, and must not, give an opinion of law on the question. Per Uwaifo JSC
CASES CITED
1. Gamioba V. Esezi II (1961) 2 SCNLR 2372. Olawonyin V. Commissioner of Police No. 2 (1961) 1 All NLR 622 3. African Newspapers of Nigeria Ltd V. The Federal Republic of Nigeria (1985) 2 NWLR (pt.6) 1374. Adesanya V. The President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (1981) 5 S.C. 112; (1981) 2 NCLR 3585. Nigeria Ports Authority V. Panalpina World Transport (Nig) Ltd (1974) 1 NMLR 82 at 95 6. Aoko V. Fagbemi (1961) 1 All NLR 400
STATUTES REFERRED TO
1. The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979 and 19992. Failed Banks (Recovery of Debts) and Financial Malpractices in Banks Decree (No 18 of 1994) 3. Banks and Other Financial Institutions Decree (No 25 of 19914. Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules Criminal Code Act, Cap. 77 Laws of the Federation 1990 5. Public Officers Protection Act (Cap. 379) Laws of the Federation of Nigeria Cap. 80 6. Laws of the Federation (The Criminal Procedure Act)?
