ABDULLAHI V. LOKO (2022)

CASE SUMMARY

Supreme Court of Nigeria

Before Their Lordships:

  • Hon. Mohammed Angulu Loko
  • Olukayode Ariwoola JSC
  • Amina Adamu Augie JSC
  • Uwani Musa Abba-Aji JSC
  • Mohammed Lawal Garba JSC
  • Adamu Jauro JSC

Suit number: SC/CV/41/2022

Delivered on: 2022-03-16

Parties:

Appellant:

  • Abubakar Umar Abdullahi

Respondents:

  • Hon. Mohammed Angulu Loko
  • All Progressives Congress (APC)
  • Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)

Background

The case of Abdullahi v. Loko revolves around the electoral dispute arising from the primary election conducted by the All Progressives Congress (APC) for the Abaji Area Council in the Federal Capital Territory. This election took place on April 23, 2021, where Hon. Mohammed Angulu Loko was declared the winner. However, dissatisfied with the result, the appellant, Abubakar Umar Abdullahi, filed an originating summons in the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. He contested the decision of the APC to forward his name as the chairmanship candidate instead of recognizing Loko as the legitimate winner.

Issues

The key issues raised were:

  1. Whether the 1st respondent’s suit was statute-barred under section 285(9) of the 1999 Constitution (4th Alteration).
  2. Whether the introduction of Exhibit Loko 3A by the 1st respondent breached the appellant’s right to a fair hearing.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court ruled that:

  1. The determination of whether an action is statute-barred is rooted in clear timelines dictated by constitutional provisions.
  2. Fair hearing rights must be upheld, but not at the cost of adhering to statutory limitations.

Court Findings

The court's analysis concluded that:

  1. The 1st respondent's suit was indeed filed after the statutory fourteen days period allowed by the Constitution, hence it was barred.
  2. The introduction of contested evidence did not sufficiently infringe on the appellant's right to a fair hearing to overturn the findings of the lower courts.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, recognizing that since the matter was statute-barred, the lower courts should not have entertained it. Thus, the suit was struck out.

Significance

This decision highlights the stringent application of statutory limits in electoral matters, emphasizing that parties must act swiftly within the prescribed timelines to avoid having their claims dismissed. It reinforces the principle that legal actions tied to electoral disputes must be timely and cannot rely solely on the subjective awareness of parties involved.

Counsel:

  • Mr. Abdul Mohammed, SAN
  • Mr. Mathew Burkaa, SAN
  • Saraffa Yusuff, Esq.
  • Bashir M. Abubakar, Esq.