Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Ekagbara V. Ikpeazu (2016) CLR 1(ZC) (SC)

Judgement delivered on January 22nd 2016

Brief

  • Parties to an Election petition
  • Federal High court jurisdiction
  • Section 272 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended)
  • <
  • Section 24(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended)
  • Section 251 (1) of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 251(1)(r) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended)
  • Section 24(f) of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 21(f) of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 31(1) of the Electoral Act 2010
  • Section 31(2) of the Electoral Act 2010
  • Section 31(3) of the Electoral Act 2010
  • Section 31(5) of the Electoral Act 2010
  • Section 31(6) of the Electoral Act 2010
  • Section 31(8) of the Electoral Act 2010
  • Section 31 of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended)
  • Section 31(5) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended)
  • Section 31(6) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended)
  • Section 87(9) of the Electoral Act 2010
  • Section 87(10) of the Electoral Act 2010
  • - Section 87 of the Electoral Act 2010 as amended

Facts

This appeal turns on the correct interpretation of the Provision of Section 31 (5) of the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended). In other words, does the Federal High Court has jurisdiction to determine issues arising from Section 31 (5) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended).

Section 31 (5) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) provides: "Any person who has reasonable grounds to believe that any information given by a candidate in the affidavit or any document submitted by that candidate is false, may file a suit at the Federal High Court, High Court of a State or FCT against such person seeking a declaration that the information contained in the affidavit is false."

The appellants herein as plaintiffs at the trial Federal High Court had approached the said Court seeking a declaration that having regard to unambiguous provisions of Section 31 (1) (2) (3) (5) (6) and (8) of the Electoral Act Cap 15 Laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 2010 (as amended) and INEC FORM CFOO1 and the Tax Payment receipts and Tax Certificate attached therewith submitted by the 1st respondent herein to INEC, the said 1st respondent was disqualified from contesting the Abia State Governorship election for submitting to INEC false information regarding his Tax Payment.

In this case, whereas the Federal High Court held that it had jurisdiction to entertain the matter, the Court of Appeal held otherwise and ordered that the matter be transferred to the State High Court for hearing. But by the provision of Section 31 (5) of the Electoral Act ( supra) it is crystal clear that three Courts are mentioned therein to writ: Federal High Court, High Court of a State or High Court of the Federal Capital Territory to which a person can approach to ventilate his grievance arising from the said section. In other words, the three Courts mentioned above, have concurrent jurisdiction to hear any application seeking to determine whether a person has submitted false information to INEC in the documents submitted by him as provided in Section 31 (5) of the Electoral Act.

Issues

  • Whether the learned justices of the Court of Appeal were right in their...
    Read More