KABIRU BELLO v. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA
(2019)LCN/13762(CA)
In The Court of Appeal of Nigeria
On Tuesday, the 20th day of August, 2019
CA/J/6C/2019
RATIO
JURISDICTION: IMPORTANCE
The principle of law with regards to statutory conditions precedents to the institution of an action and the jurisdiction of a Court is settled. Wisdom demands that I begin with the landmark decision of GABRIEL MADUKOLU & ORS. V. JOHNSON NKEMDILIM (1962) 2 ALL NLR 587 AT 595; (1962) 2 S.C.N.L.R 341 AT 343, PARA C-D, where the Supreme Court laid down the conditions to determine the competence of a Court to exercise jurisdiction over a matter. From this timeless decision of the apex Court, a Court will only be competent if:
1. “It is properly constituted as regards numbers and qualifications of the numbers of the bench and no member is disqualified for one reason or another; and
2. The subject matter of the case is within its jurisdiction and there is no feature in the case which prevents the Court from exercising its jurisdiction; and
3. The case comes before the Court initiated by due process of law and upon fulfillment of any condition precedent to the exercise of jurisdiction.” PER UCHECHUKWU ONYEMENAM, J.C.A.
JURISDICTION: EFFECT OF A COURT NOT HAVING JURISDICTION
See also NDAEYO V. OGUNAYA (1977) 1 S.C 7 AT 14, PARAS A ? B wherein the Supreme Court, per Idigbe, J.S.C warned that:
“Where, therefore, a Court takes it upon itself to exercise a jurisdiction which it does not possess, its decision amounts to nothing.”
The above immaculate statements of the law are found on the holden of Karibi-Whyte, J.S.C in NWOKORO V. ONUMA (1990) NWLR (PT. 136) 22 AT 32; wherein his Lordship held as follows:
“It is a fundamental principle of legality that where an act or course of conduct fails to meet with the requirements prescribed by law, such that the non-compliance renders that act or course of conduct devoid of legal effect, no legal consequences flow from such acts or course of conduct.” PER UCHECHUKWU ONYEMENAM, J.C.A.
ALL PRE-CONDITIONS TO STARTING A MATTER MUST BE FULFILLED AND HOW IT AFFECTS JURISDICTION
Again, Tobi, J.S.C in INAKOJU V. ADELEKE (2007) 4 NWLR (Pt. 1025) P. 423 on the same note said:
“Where the constitution or a statue provides for the pre-condition for the doing of a thing or force the attainment of a particular situation, the pre-condition must be fulfilled or satisfied before the particular situation will be said to have been attained or reached. The common and popular pet expression for it is ‘condition precedent’. …The Courts are bound to enforce the mandatory provisions of a substantive law including the constitution. It is the duty of all Courts to give effect to legislation. Therefore, parties cannot by consent or acquiescence or failure to object, nullify the effect of a statute or Constitution. In other words, it is the duty of a Court to enforce mandatory provision of an enactment”.
A year after, the Supreme Court, in DREXEL ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES LTD V. TRANS INTERNATIONAL BANK LTD. (2008) 18 NWLR (PT. 1119) 388 AT 431, PARAS. D-E emphatically restated the law that where a pre-condition for initiating a legal process is laid down, any suit initiated in contravention of the pre-condition is incompetent and a Court of law lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the same. PER UCHECHUKWU ONYEMENAM, J.C.A.
JURISDICTION: WHETHER A LITIGANT CAN CONFER JURISDICTION ON ANY COURT
The law is trite and well settled that no litigant can confer jurisdiction on any Court where the Constitution or a statute or any provision of the common law says that the Court shall have no jurisdiction. See: JIKANTORO & 6 ORS. V. DANTORO & 5 ORS. (2004) 5 SC (PT. 2) PAGE 1 AT 21; (REPORTED AS NDAYAKO V. DANTORO (2004) 13 NWLR (Pt. 889) 187. … PER UCHECHUKWU ONYEMENAM, J.C.A.
ELECTION PETITION: UNDER WHAT LAW CAN COMPLAINTS OF ELECTION PETITION BE BROUGHT
With reference made to the case of OBASANJO & 2 ORS. V. YUSUF & ANOR. (2005) 20 WRN PAGE 1 AT 86; (2004) 9 NWLR (PT. 877) 144 AT PAGE 210, PARAS. B-C, this Court held and said:
Complaints against the conduct of election can only be found in the Electoral Act, as the Act provides breaches in the conduct of elections. The Electoral Act is a comprehensive Act which deals with the conduct of elections in this country. The Courts are bound to look into the Act in cases of breach in the conduct of elections.” PER UCHECHUKWU ONYEMENAM, J.C.A.
JURISDICTION: WHETHER A COURT CAN CONFER ON ITSELF JURISDICTION
The law is well settled that where a particular Court or tribunal has been specifically conferred with a special power to adjudicate upon a matter or action as in the instant case, it is not the business of any other Court or tribunal which lacks such express power to arrogate to itself the power to entertain such a matter or action. See: ENAGI V. INUWA (1992) 3 NWLR (PT. 231) 548 AT 565. PER UCHECHUKWU ONYEMENAM, J.C.A.
JUSTICES
UCHECHUKWU ONYEMENAM Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria
MUDASHIRU NASIRU ONIYANGI Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria
BOLOUKUROMO MOSES UGO Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria
Between
KABIRU BELLO Appellant(s)
AND
FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA Respondent(s)
UCHECHUKWU ONYEMENAM, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment): The decision of the High Court of Borno State overruling the objection of the Appellant on 13th November, 2018 and holding that the Court had jurisdiction to hear and determine the case is subject of this appeal.
The Appellant alongside two other persons were arraigned before the Borno State High Court in Charge No: BOHC/MG/CR/51/2018 by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission EFCC for offences of criminal conspiracy to corrupt public officers; corrupt procurement of monetary benefit; receipt of monetary benefit; and corrupt conferment of monetary benefit on another under the Corrupt Practice and Other Related Offences Act 2000.
After taking his plea of not guilty, the prosecution called 5 witnesses to prove its case. And upon the close of the prosecution’s case the Appellant who was the 2nd accused person at trial together with his other co-accused persons raised objection to the jurisdiction of the trial Court to continue with the trial. The Appellant?s contention was that from the evidence led, the trial Court lacks jurisdiction to hear and determine the
1
case as mandatory condition precedent for the initiation of the case had not been fulfilled.
The learned trial Judge over-ruled the objection and held that the Court had jurisdiction to hear and determine the case. Dissatisfied with the ruling, the Appellant sought and obtained the leave of the trial Court to appeal to this Court on 28th November, 2018. The Appellant pursuant to the leave granted filed his notice and grounds of appeal on 28th November, 2018 containing 2 grounds of appeal.
From the records the brief fact is that the Appellant who was then a public servant and staff of Independent National Electoral Commission INEC; was an election official during the 2015 General Election. The Respondent alleged that in the course of the conduct of the 2015 Presidential Election, the Appellant committed a crime as he received and/or gave bribe to influence the outcome of the 2015 election. Accordingly, the Appellant was charged under the Corrupt Practice and other related Offences Act, 2000; without recommendation for the trial or prosecution of the Appellant by any election petition tribunal or Court.
In this Court after due filing and exchange
2
of briefs, the appeal was heard on 23rd May, 2019; wherein ZANNA HAMZA Esq. appeared for the Appellant, and KHALID SANUSI Principal Legal Officer with EFCC represented the Respondent. Mr. Hamza without objection sought for and withdrew Motion on Notice filed 17th May, for consolidation.
Mr. Hamza adopted Appellant?s brief filed 18th March, 2019 in urging the Court to allow the appeal. On his part, Mr. Sanusi adopted the Respondent?s brief filed 23rd April, 2019 in urging the Court to dismiss the appeal and affirm the decision of the trial Court.
In the Appellant?s brief prepared by Mr. Zanna Hamza, he formulated the under reproduced lone issue for the determination of the appeal.
?Whether in view of the provision of Section 150 of the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended); Section 285(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as altered) and decision in F.R.N V. SOLOMON (2018) 7 NWLR (PT. 1618) P. 201 the trial Court has jurisdiction to try this case bearing in mind that the alleged offences are directly connected to the 2015 General Election.?
For the Respondent, Mr. Al? Qasim Jaafar also
3
distilled a sole issue for the determination of the appeal to wit:
?Whether the prosecution has power to prosecute this case in the lower Court.?
I shall adopt the sole issue as formulated by the Appellant for the determination of the appeal.
SUBMISSIONS ON SOLE ISSUE
Mr. Hamza submitted on the jurisdiction of a Court and its importance in the adjudication of matters. He relied on: WESTERN STEEL WORKS LTD. V. IRON & STEEL WORKERS UNION (1986) 2 NSCC (VOL. 17) 786; LABIYI V. ANRETIOLA (1992) 8 NWLR (PT. 221 33; UMANAH V. ATTAH (2006) 17 NWLR (PT. 1009) 503 SC.
The learned counsel rehashed the charge against the Appellant at the trial Court and argued that the evidence at the trial Court revealed beyond peradventure that the offences were allegedly committed during and in connection with the presidential election held across Nigeria, including Borno State on 28th March, 2015. He attempted the definition of influence, to submit that by the provisions of Sections 138 (1) (b); 149 and 150 (1) and (2) of the Electoral Act, 2010; OLALOMI IND. LTD V. N.I.D.B. LTD (2009) 16 NWLR (PT.1167) P. 266; FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA V.ENWENEDE SOLOMON & ORS.
4
(2018) 7 NWLR (PT. 1618) 201; the trial Court or a magistrate Court can only exercise special powers/exclusive jurisdiction under Section 150(1) of the Electoral Act, (supra) to try such offences, if and only if an election tribunal, pursuant to Section 149 thereof, in an election petition presented before it, makes a recommendation to INEC in that regard.
The learned counsel for the Appellant argued extensively and emphatically that where a pre-condition for initiating a legal process is laid down, any suit initiated in contravention of the pre-condition is incompetent and a Court of law lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the same. He cited:DREXEL ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES LTD. V. TRANS INTERNATIONAL BANK LTD. (2008) 18 NWLR (PT. 1119) 388. He quoted holistically the apex Court?s decision in FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA V. ENWENEDE SOLOMON & ORS. (supra); and other related authorities on this principle in urging the Court to allow the appeal.
?
Mr. Jaafar, the learned counsel for the Respondent in adverse response referred to Section 138 (1) (b) of the Electoral Act, 2010 to submit that the offences as charged
5
did not arise from the Respondent?s questioning the 2015 presidential election. He referred to Pages 24 to 69 of the records. He categorically stated that the offences as charged which are offences of Criminal Conspiracy and corruptly Procuring Monetary Benefit in Favour of Public Officers; squarely fall under the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act 2000.
He further submitted that the case of F.R.N. V. SOLOMON 2018 7 NWLR (PT. 1618) 201 is not applicable as he differentiated the same from the instant appeal.
Also the Respondent?s counsel relied on Section 7 (2) (f) of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act 2004 and Section 61 (3) of The Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000; as to the powers of the Respondent to prosecute and the Court with jurisdiction to submit that the High Court of Borno State has jurisdiction to entertain the present matter.
He urged the Court to dismiss the appeal and affirm the decision of the trial Court.
RESOLUTION OF SOLE ISSUE
The principle of law with regards to statutory conditions precedents to the institution of an action and the jurisdiction of a Court is settled. Wisdom demands that I begin with the landmark decision of GABRIEL MADUKOLU & ORS. V. JOHNSON NKEMDILIM (1962) 2 ALL NLR 587 AT 595; (1962) 2 S.C.N.L.R 341 AT 343, PARA C-D,%C
