LawCare Nigeria

Nigeria Legal Information & Law Reports

ACTION ALLIANCE v. INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION & ORS.(2012)

ACTION ALLIANCE v. INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION & ORS.

In The Supreme Court of Nigeria

On Tuesday, the 14th day of February, 2012

SC.23/2012

RATIO

JUDGMENT: PERIOD OF TIME FOR AN ELECTION TRIBUNAL TO DELIVER ITS JUDGMENT IN WRITING

The petition giving rise to this appeal was filed on 17th May, 2011 and by the provision of Section 285(6) of 1999 Constitution an election tribunal shall deliver its judgment in writing within one hundred and eight (180) days from the date of the filing of the petition. PER WALTER SAMUEL NKANU ONNOGHEN, J.S.C

 

JUSTICES

WALTER SAMUEL NKANU ONNOGHEN   Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

IBRAHIM TANKO MUHAMMAD   Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

OLUFUNLOLA OYELOLA ADEKEYE   Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

NWALI SYLVESTER NGWUTA   Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

MARY UKAEGO PETER-ODILI   Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

Between

 

ACTION ALLIANCE Appellant(s)

 

 

AND

  1. INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION (INEC)
    2. SENATOR ISIAKA ABIOLA AJIMOBI
    3. ACCORD PARTY
    4. ACTION CONGRESS OF NIGERIA
    5. PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC PARTY Respondent(s)

WALTER SAMUEL NKANU ONNOGHEN, J.S.C (Delivering the Leading Judgment): The petition giving rise to this appeal was filed on 17th May, 2011 and by the provision of Section 285(6) of 1999 Constitution an election tribunal shall deliver its judgment in writing within one hundred and eight (180) days from the date of the filing of the petition.
The relief sought by the appellant includes an order that the petition be returned to the tribunal to be heard de novo by another panel. As at today, the one hundred and eighty (180) days has long lapsed and by the decisions of this court the time stipulated in the constitution cannot be extended, which an order of retrial would tend to effect.
In the circumstance the appeal is misconceived as same is an exercise in futility and is consequently dismissed.
I make no order as to costs.
Appeal dismissed.

 

Appearances

  1. Lawal Esq. with him A. Adeyemo Esq.For Appellant

 

AND

Ahmed Raji Esq for the 1st respondent with him Adeola Adedipo Esq, Z. Garuba; O. Omo-Eghareyba Esq.
Chief Akin Olusinmo SAN for the 2nd and 4th respondents with Michael Lana Esq.
Chief O. Oke for the 5th respondent with him are Chief A. O. Ajana, J. O. Mafo Etq; W. A. Olajide; S. C Ikuesan,; O. Aiyemo; M. Kilani (Miss).
W. A Olajide Esq for the 6th respondent Aham Eke-Ejelam Esq for the appellant with B. O. B Udeire, Esq.
No appearance for the 3rd respondent though sent hearing notice on 10th February, 2012 and there is proof of service.For Respondent