site logo

ADESANYA VS. PRESIDENT, FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA (2001)

case summary

Supreme Court of Nigeria

Before Their Lordships:

  • Atanda Fatai-Williams, CJN
  • George Sowemimo, JSC
  • Mohammed Bello, JSC
  • Chukwunweike Idigbe, JSC
  • Andrews Otutu Obaseki, JSC
  • Augustine Nnamani, JSC
  • Muhammadu Lawal Uwais, JSC

Parties:

Appellant:

  • Senator Abraham Ade. Adesanya

Respondent:

  • President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria
Suit number: SC. 1/81

Background

This case arose from the jurisdictional issue of whether a senator has standing to challenge the constitutionality of an appointment made by the President of Nigeria. The appellant, Senator Abraham Ade. Adesanya, contested the appointment of Hon. Mr. Justice Ovie-Whiskey as Chairman of the Federal Electoral Commission citing his disqualification due to his position as Chief Judge of Bendel State. The Senate confirmed this appointment on July 17, 1980, in which Adesanya participated but eventually sought to declare the appointment null and void.

Issues

The primary issues before the Supreme Court included:

  1. Whether the appellant had locus standi to institute the action.
  2. Whether the Court of Appeal erred in adjudicating on the substantive issues instead of referring them to the Supreme Court as specified under the provisions of the Constitution.

Ratio Decidendi

The court emphasized that standing, or locus standi, is a legal capacity to initiate proceedings in a court of law, which hinges on the party showing that their civil rights or obligations are in jeopardy. In this case, the justices held that the fact Adesanya was unable to convince his fellow senators of his stance meant he could not claim personal injury as required by section 6(6)(b) of the 1979 Constitution.

Court Findings

The Supreme Court found that:

  1. The Court of Appeal incorrectly decided on the appellant's locus standi instead of referring the question to the Supreme Court.
  2. As a senator who was part of the Senate deliberation, Adesanya could not claim standing as a private citizen regarding matters that pertained to his legislative function.
  3. The terms of section 259(3) of the 1979 Constitution limited judicial review only to cases that involved justiciable disputes.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, ruling that Senator Adesanya lacked the requisite standing to initiate the claim challenging the constitutionality of the presidential appointment in question.

Significance

This case underscores critical points about locus standi within Nigerian constitutional law, reinforcing the necessity for a tangible interest in declaring the validity of legislative actions, thus clarifying the boundaries of judicial intervention in legislative matters.

Counsel:

  • Chief Gani Fawehinmi, Esq.
  • Chief R. O. A. Akinjide, SAN, Attorney-General of the Federation