Federal Electoral Commission V. Alhaji Mohammed Goni & Anor (1983)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

ANIAGOLU, J.S.C. 

On 3rd August 1983, this Court dismissed the above appeal, with no order as to costs, and reserved the reasons for the judgment to be delivered on a later date to be notified to the parties. The notification fixed the date at 14th October, 1983. I now give my reasons for the said dismissal of the appeal.

The case, the facts of which arose from Borno State, was commenced by originating summons, filed in the High Court of Lagos and which reads:

“Originating Summons

LET the Federal Electoral Commission of Onikan, Lagos within Eight days after service of this summons on it, inclusive of the day of such service cause an appearance to be entered for it to this Summons which is issued on the application of Alhaji Mohammed Goni of Government House, Maiduguri and the Unity Party of Nigeria of 8 Eletu Odibo Street, Abule-Ijesha, Lagos, who claim for determination the following questions –

(a) Whether the determination of the qualification of a person for election to the office of the Governor of a State under s.166 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979 ought to be made by reference to s.62 of the Constitution or to s.64 thereof or to both

(b) If such determination is to be made by reference to s.62 of the Constitution whether the 1st plaintiff is disqualified from contesting election to the office of Governor of Borno State.

(c) If such determination is to be made by any reference to s.64 whether all the grounds for the loss of the seat of a senator specified in paragraphs (a)-(g) inclusive of s.64(1) are capable of being applied to a candidate for election to the office of Governor

(d) In determining which of the said paragraphs of s.64(1) are capable of being applied thereto is it permissible to alter or substitute for the words, situations and institutions occurring in those paragraphs other words, situations and institutions different from those prescribed therein

(e) If the answer to the question is in the affirmative, what words, situations and institutions ought to be substituted for which in each of such paragraphs

(f) Is paragraph (g) of s.64(1) one of those which are capable of being made applicable to a candidate for the office of Governor by such alteration or substitution

(g) If the answer is in the affirmative, whether the circumstances in which the 1st plaintiff became a member of the 2nd defendant (sic) does not preserve his eligibility for election to the office of governor aforesaid within the scope of the proviso to s.64(1) (g) of the Constitution

AND the plaintiffs claim the following reliefs:

(i) A declaration that the 1st plaintiff is qualified for election to the office of Governor of Borno State;