site logo

OBAYEMI TOYIN V. AROGUNDADE SAMUEL MUSA ET AL (2020)

case summary

Supreme Court of Nigeria

Before Their Lordships:

  • I. Tanko Muhammad JSC
  • Mary Ukaego Peter-Odili JSC
  • Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun JSC
  • Amiru Sanusi JSC
  • Jembi Eko JSC

Parties:

Appellant:

  • Obayemi Toyin

Respondents:

  • Arogundade Samuel Musa
  • Independent National Electoral Commission
  • Talabi Ajayi Odunayo
  • People’s Democratic Party
Suit number: 307/2018

Background

This case arises from the disqualification of Obayemi Toyin in the pre-election primaries for the Ekiti State House of Assembly, held on November 29, 2014, by the People’s Democratic Party (PDP). Toyin alleged that the candidate presented by the party, Arogundade Samuel Musa, was unqualified due to a forged certificate. Following a series of electoral disputes and legal actions starting with an originating summons at the Federal High Court, which granted Toyin reliefs, the respondents appealed, resulting in the Court of Appeal reversing the trial court's decision. This led to Toyin's further appeal to the Supreme Court.

Issues

The core issues before the Supreme Court centered on:

  1. The jurisdiction of the court to hear a pre-election appeal filed beyond the statutory limit.
  2. The applicability of the limitation period as stipulated in section 2(13) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court found that the appeal was filed beyond the 60-day statutory period, as set out in the Constitution, meaning the court was divested of jurisdiction to hear the matter. The court underscored that any appeal not resolved within the prescribed statutory period is deemed statute-barred and therefore invalid.

Court Findings

The court established that:

  1. The notice of appeal was filed on March 23, 2018, with the responses exceeding the prescribed 60 days for resolution, rendering the appeal incompetent.
  2. Section 285(12) of the Constitution emphasizes strict adherence to timelines in electoral matters, asserting that failure to comply affects the court's jurisdiction.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court ultimately ruled to strike out the appeal on grounds of lack of jurisdiction due to the expiry of the statutory period for hearing the appeal.

Significance

This ruling reinforces the importance of statutory timelines within electoral processes, emphasizing that delays in filing and resolving pre-election matters can critically affect a party’s right to appeal, thereby upholding constitutional provisions aimed at ensuring timely electoral processes. The case sets a clear precedent on the intersection of procedural law and electoral rights in Nigeria.