Adeyinka Abosede Badejo (Miss) V. Federal Minister Of Education & Ors. (1996)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

KUTIGI, J.S.C. 

The appellant commenced this action through her father and next friend by a Motion Ex-Parte dated 29th September, 1988 pursuant to Order I Rules 2(3) & 6 of the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 1979 for the following:-

1. An order granting leave to the applicant to apply to this Honourable Court for an Order to enforce and secure within Lagos State her fundamental human right to freedom from discrimination as contained in Section 39(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979 which right has been breached by the respondents who refused to call her for interview for admission into Junior Secondary-1 for the 1989 Session in Federal Government Colleges merely on the ground of the applicant’s state of origin.
2. An interim order restraining the respondents their agents and privies from conducting the interview for admission into Junior Secondary-1 for the 1989 session at Queens College, Yaba Lagos, Federal Government College Ijanikin Lagos and all other designated interview centres throughout Nigeria on Saturday October 8, 1988 or an order directing a stay of all actions on matters relating to admission of students for the 1989 session at Queens College Yaba Lagos, Federal Government College Ijanikin, Lagos and all other Federal Government Colleges in Nigeria for which the interview mentioned in this application is planned until the final determination of the application of the applicant for an order enforcing and securing the enforcement within Lagos State of the Applicant’s said right to freedom for discrimination on the ground of her state of origin.”
3. An interlocutory order restraining the 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents and/or their agents and privies from marking the scripts of candidates for and/or collating and/or releasing the results of the interview examination held all over Nigeria on 8th October 1988 in respect of the admission of candidates into Junior Secondary School in all Federal Government Colleges in Nigeria including Queens College Lagos by any form of publication issuance and despatch of letters of admission until the final determination of the applicant’s application to enforce and secure the enforcement of her fundamental right to freedom from discrimination as provided by Section 39(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979 and to deem the said motion as having been properly so amended.”

(Added by an amendment of 20th October 1988, See page 58 of Record).

In the statement accompanying the Ex-Parte motion also dated 29th September, 1988 the appellant sought for the following reliefs:-

“(i) A declaration that the applicant is entitled to freedom from discrimination on the basis of her state of origin with regards to the cutoff mark and marks scored by the applicant and the applicant’s eligibility to be called for interview for admission into Federal Government Colleges.

(ii) A declaration that the decision of the respondent not to call the applicant for interview based on the criterion published by the respondents in both the Daily Times and National Concord Newspapers of September 16th, 1988 which said criterion was adopted by the Respondents in the selection of candidates for interview for admission to Secondary-1 in Federal Government Colleges in 1989 is discriminatory to the applicant, is faulty, irregular, unconstitutional, null, and void.”

On the 5th day of October, 1988 the High Court granted the appellant leave to apply for the enforcement of her fundamental right but declined or refused her prayer for an interim order of injunction against the Respondents from conducting interview for admission to Federal Government Colleges on Saturday the 8th day of October, 1988 without first giving the respondents a hearing on the issue.

Pursuant to the grant of leave above, the substantive Motion on Notice for the enforcement of fundamental right was then filed. The papers include Affidavit Verifying the Fact Relied upon and an Affidavit of Urgency. The respondents on their part filed a Counter Affidavit as well as a Further Counter Affidavit. It is important to note at once that the appellant filed no reply to any of the Counter Affidavits as I will explain later.

Counsel on both sides addressed the court on 20th October, 1988 and Ruling thereon was reserved till 4th November, 1988. On that day the learned trial judge delivered her ruling dismissing appellant’s application or motion when she concluded on page 76 of the record as follows-

“It is my considered opinion that the applicant had not been able to establish that she had suffered by the acts of respondents, injuries greater than those suffered by all the other successful candidates who were not called for interview in the Common Entrance Examination.

I am therefore of the firm view that the applicant has no locus standi to bring this application. See also Gouriet v. Union Post Office Workers (1978) A.C. 437.

The application therefore fails and it is hereby dismissed.”

Aggrieved by the above ruling, the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal, Lagos Judicial Division. Only one issue was submitted for determination which reads:-

“The central issue for determination in the appeal is whether or not the appellant/applicant has locus standi to bring the action. In order to analyze this issue it is pertinent to examine the facts of the case.”