BELLO V. DAMISA (2017)

Background

This case concerns an election petition arising from the Kogi State Federal House of Representatives election for the Okene/Ogori-Magogo Constituency, contested by Rt. Hon. Abdullahi Bello (APC) and Hon. Yusuf Ahmed Tijani Damisa (PDP). The initial petition by Damisa was dismissed by the Kogi State Election Petition Tribunal in October 2015, which upheld Bello's election. Damisa subsequently appealed to the Court of Appeal, which overturned the tribunal's decision in December 2015, thereby declaring Damisa the winner. Following this, the appellants (Bello and APC) filed a motion seeking to set aside the Court of Appeal's decision, claiming it was made without jurisdiction.

Issues

The Supreme Court was tasked with resolving several key issues:

1. Whether the lower court was correct in holding that it lacked jurisdiction to set aside its earlier orders.
2. Whether the appeal constituted an abuse of court process.
3. Whether the Supreme Court itself had jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court concluded that:

1. The Court of Appeal's decision regarding election petitions is final as per section 246(3) of the 1999 Constitution, meaning the Supreme Court could not review it.
2. As per section 285(7) of the 1999 Constitution, any appeal in election matters must be resolved within 60 days; failure to comply with this timeline means the appeal cannot be entertained.

Court Findings

The court found that:

1. The appellants filed their application to set aside the judgment outside the constitutionally mandated 60-day period, validating the lower court's dismissal of the motion.
2. Since the appeal stemmed from a judgment concerning an election to the National Assembly, the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction to hear it given the clear provision in the Constitution that the decision of the Court of Appeal is final in such cases.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal as incompetent, reiterating that courts only possess jurisdiction as granted by the law and that failure to act within statutory timeframes can deprive courts of their jurisdiction.

Significance

This case underscores the finality of election petition judgments and the jurisdictional limitations pertaining to appeals in Nigeria's electoral process, emphasizing the importance of adhering to statutory timelines to safeguard the integrity of electoral outcomes.