Background
The Supreme Court of Nigeria adjudicated the electoral dispute stemming from the presidential elections held on August 11, 1979. The core issue arose when Chief Obafemi Awolowo, the appellant and candidate of the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN), contested the declaration by F. L. O. Menkiti, the Returning Officer, that Alhaji Shehu Shagari of the National Party of Nigeria (NPN) was duly elected. The election results showed Shagari received a total of 5,688,857 votes against Awolowo’s 4,916,651 votes.
Issues
The key legal questions to be resolved included:
- What constitutes “two-thirds” of the States of the Federation?
- Did Shagari gain at least one-quarter of the votes in two-thirds of the States as stipulated by the Electoral Decree?
- The interpretation of section 34A(1)(c)(ii) of the Electoral Decree regarding the conditions for presidential elections.
- The implications of alleged non-compliance with electoral law and whether it affected the election outcome.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that:
- The phrase “two-thirds of all the States” refers specifically to twelve and two-thirds States, and not merely to simple fractions of votes.
- Shagari's total score in each State was significant, but he needed a quarter of the votes in at least 13 States to be deemed elected.
- The principle of non-compliance must be weighed against whether such non-compliance materially affected the election.
Court Findings
The leading judgment of the Supreme Court, delivered by Chief Justice Atanda Fatayi-Williams, ruled that Shagari had obtained the highest number of votes nationwide and had secured at least 25% of the votes cast in twelve States. Regarding Kano State, where he scored 19.94% of the total votes, the lead judgment accepted the Returning Officer's interpretation that the requirement of "not less than one-quarter of the votes cast at the election in each of at least two-thirds of all the States" could be satisfied by counting two-thirds of the votes cast in Kano State. Since two-thirds of the total votes cast in Kano State was calculated, and Shagari's votes exceeded one-quarter of that two-thirds portion, the Court held that he met the legal threshold in Kano State for the purpose of the presidential election. Therefore, the shortfall in the overall percentage in Kano State was not fatal to his election under the Electoral Decree.
Dissenting opinion (Eso, JSC):
- A state is a territorial unit and cannot be fractionalized.
- Two-thirds of 19 states should be interpreted as 13 whole states.
- The Returning Officer's fractionalization of Kano State was improper.
- Shagari did not satisfy the constitutional requirement.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court dismissed Awolowo's appeal, affirming the lower Tribunal's finding that Shagari was duly elected, despite his shortcomings in Kano State. The dismissal came with a clarification that the legislative intention, underscored by statutory interpretation principles, needed to be followed to uphold the election's integrity.
Significance
The case is significant for its detailed analysis of statutory interpretation principles and the electoral law requirements for presidential elections in Nigeria. It also clarified the meaning of "two-thirds of all the States" as applied to the presidential election criteria.