DAPIANLONG V. DARIYE (NO. 2) (2007)

CASE SUMMARY

Supreme Court of Nigeria

Before Their Lordships:

  • Hon. Onnoghen JSC
  • Hon. Katsina-Alu JSC
  • Hon. Mohammed JSC
  • Hon. Tabai JSC
  • Hon. Aderemi JSC
  • Hon. Ogbuagu JSC

Suit number: SC. 39/2007

Delivered on: 2007-04-27

Parties:

Appellants:

  • Michael Dapianlong
  • Nazifi Mohammed
  • Rahila Baleri
  • Nanchang Napchwat
  • Emmanuel Danboyi Jugul
  • Dina Lar

Respondents:

  • Chief (Dr.) Joshua Chibi Dariye
  • John Mark Samchi

Background

The appeal in this case arose from an impeachment proceeding against Governor Joshua Chibi Dariye, conducted by the Plateau State House of Assembly. Following the defection of 14 members from the Peoples Democratic Party to the Advanced Congress of Democrats, the assembly was reduced to 10 members, of which only 8 initiated impeachment proceedings against the governor. Dariye challenged these proceedings on constitutional grounds, arguing they lacked the required legislative support.

Issues

The main issues presented before the Supreme Court were:

  1. Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to invoke section 16 of the Court of Appeal Act to hear both the preliminary objection and the originating summons.
  2. Whether the impeachment complied with the requirements of section 188 of the Constitution, particularly regarding the necessary majority.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, asserting that the impeachment process did not meet constitutional requirements. It emphasized that the impeachment required a two-thirds majority of the 24-member assembly, which translates to 16 votes. The actions of the 8 remaining members, therefore, were invalid.

Court Findings

The court found that while 8 members constituted a one-third majority of the 10 that remained, it fell short of the constitutional requirement pertaining to the total membership of the assembly. Furthermore, the assembly had the procedural obligation to wait for by-elections to fill the vacated seats before proceeding with impeachment.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal, which declared the impeachment null and void. The court ruled that the failure to adhere to constitutional and procedural principles in the impeachment process rendered it invalid. Dariye was reinstated to his office as Governor.

Significance

This case underscores the importance of strict adherence to constitutional provisions in impeachment proceedings. It sets a precedent regarding the interpretation of legislative processes, particularly in ensuring that representatives are adequately constituted to reflect the electorate’s mandate in serious governance matters such as impeachment.

Counsel:

  • Chief Gani Fawehinmi SAN
  • Emmanuel Toro Esq., SAN