Senator Festus Bode Ola V. Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) & Anor (2012)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

JIMI OLUKAYODE BADA, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of Federal High Court, holden at Ado-Ekiti in suit no. FHC/AD/M08/2010 – SENATOR FESTUS BODE OLA V. INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION (INEC) & 1 OTHER; delivered on 7th day of December, 2010.

Briefly the facts of the case are that the Appellant as Applicant filed an originating summons at the trial court in which he contended that he was entitled to payment of salaries and allowances due to him as a Senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria for a period of four (4) years being the life span of Senate between proclamation and dissolution and specifically that he was entitled to those emoluments between 29th day of May, 2007 and 6th July, 2009 when he was at the Tribunal and thereafter declared the winner of the Election held in April, 2007, but consequently sworn in as a member of the National Assembly (Senate) on 7th July, 2009.

At the conclusion of hearing, the trial court in a considered judgment dismissed the suit. It is against this judgment that this appeal was lodged.

The learned counsel for the Appellant formulated a sole issue for the determination of the Appeal. The said issue is set out as follows:-

“Whether the trial court was right when it held that the Appellant was not entitled to payment of salaries, allowances and emolument for the period from 29th May, 2007 (date of proclamation of the Senate) to 6th July 2009 (the date of his preceding swearing-in at the Senate)”.

Distilled from Grounds 1, 2 and 5 of the Notice and Grounds of Appeal).

The learned counsel for the 1st Respondent formulated a similar issue for determination. The issue is set out as follows:

“Whether the trial court was not right when it held that the Appellant was not entitled to Payment of salaries, allowances and emoluments for the period from 29th May, 2007 (date of proclamation of the Senate) to 6th July 2009 (date preceding his swearing-in at the Senate).

On his own part the learned counsel for the 2nd Respondent adopted the issue as formulated on behalf of the Appellant.

At the hearing, learned counsel for the Appellant referred to the Appellant’s brief of argument filed on 6/7/2012. He applied to adopt the said brief as his argument in this appeal.

He urged that the appeal be allowed.

On his own part, the learned counsel for the 1st Respondent referred to the 1st Respondent’s brief of argument filed on 27/7/2012.

He adopted the brief as his argument in this appeal and he urged that the appeal be dismissed.