As the General Elections approach , I have been perturbed by incessant calls over the past few days by Nigerians on the recent discus on the failure of the Nigerian President ,Mr Muhammadu Buhari to sufficiently show proof of relevant school leaving certificates to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) ,as required by law.I have also seen various views of distinguished learned counsel most respectably ,Ebun Adegboruwa Esq and Okutepa (SAN) who have both espoused reasons why Mr President is legally qualified to contest as the Presidential candidate in the 2019 Elections under the All Progressive Congress .Of Note however ,is the view of Mr Taiwo Osipitan (SAN). Having read through their various Articles ,I'm afraid I gravely go contrary to the similar views exposed by this learned gentlemen.I infact maintain that President Muhammadu Buhari having failed to present or show sufficient proof of relevant school leaving certificates to INEC is not eligible to contest the 2019 elections.
The Constitution as the grundnorm provides for the law with respect to eligibility into the position of the President and other elective positions such as the position of the Governor, Senators and members of the National and State Assemblies. Section 130 of the 1999 Constitution provides thus that “there shall be for the Federation, a President” and such “President shall be the Head of State, the Chief Executive of the Federation and Commander- In –Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federation”.
Qualification to the position of the President is provided for in Section 131(a-d), states that – A person shall be qualified for election to the office of President if –
a.he is a citizen of Nigeria by birth;
b.he has attained the age of forty – years.
c.he is a member of a political party and is sponsored by that political party;
and
d.he has been educated up to at least School Certificate level or its
equivalent.
The emphasis of this piece is centered on whether a Presidential candidate can vie for the position of the exalted office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria without showing proof of being educated up to at least School Certificate level or its equivalent and or as provided in Sections 131(d) of the Constitution . When the above provision is construed in its literal grammatical meaning, persons seeking to vie for the position of the Presidency who do not possess the Secondary School Leaving Certificate or its equivalent are not qualified to contest election to the office of President. In other words, upon a cursory reading of the provision of Section 131(d), it is evident that unless a person possesses the Secondary School Leaving Certificate or its equivalent (Grade II Teacher’s Certificate, the City and Guilds Certificate), he or she is ordinarily not eligible to contest election to the office of the President of Nigeria.Well ,before stating my candid position of the law in this regards ,I would briefly give a rundown on the contrary but brilliant position of Taiwo Osipitan (SAN).
TAIWO OSIPITAN(SAN).
Notable Constitutional Lawyer, Taiwo Osipitan (SAN) position on the above issues is to the effect that the above Section 131(d) CFRN must be read along with Section 318(1) of the Nigerian constitution, which is the Interpretation Section of the Nigerian Constitution. According to him , upon a careful reading of the said Interpretation Section, that even persons whose educational qualifications are below the Secondary School Leaving Certificate/level and its equivalent are still qualified to contest election, if they possess the Primary Six School Leaving Certificate or its equivalent along with the other requirements listed under the said definition Section (Section 318(1))."
For the avoidance of doubt, Section 318(1) provides:
“School Certificate or its equivalent” means -
(a) a Secondary School Certificate or its equivalent, or Grade II Teacher’s Certificate, the City and Guilds Certificate; or
(b) education up to Secondary School Certificate level; or
(c) Primary Six School Leaving Certificate or its equivalent and-
(i) service in the public or private sector in the Federation in any capacity acceptable to the Independent National Electoral Commission for a minimum of ten years, and
(ii) attendance at courses and training in such institutions as may be acceptable to the Independent National Electoral Commission for periods totalling up to a minimum of one year, and
(iii) the ability to read, write, understand and communicate in the English language to the satisfaction of the Independent National Electoral Commission; and
(d) any other qualification acceptable by the Independent National Electoral Commission;”
The learned Silk stressed the point that there is the need to acknowledge the trite rule of interpretation of Statutes which is to the effect that a Section of a Statute should not be construed in isolation. According to him all sections in a Statute must be interpreted conjunctively, especially where the Statute has a definition Section, as it is the case with the 1999 Constitution (as amended).Section 131(d) according to him,must therefore be construed in conjunction with Section 318(1) of the constitution which defines the words “School Certificate or its equivalent.”
He firmly pointed out that, it is evident from the above definition Section of the Constitution (Section 318(1)), that the meaning of “School Certificate or its equivalent”, for the purpose of Section 131(d) of the Constitution, is very liberal and accommodating. He stressed that the above provision accommodates persons with the Primary School Leaving Certificate coupled with private or public sector experience and who have attended courses and training for periods totalling up to a minimum of one year and that such primary school certificate holders must also demonstrate ability to read, write, understand and communicate in the English language to the satisfaction of INEC. He further explained that the definition of “School Certificate or its equivalent” also includes candidates who are educated up to the Secondary School Certificate level and that candidates need not produce certificates evidencing that they passed secondary school examination and instead what they must produce is evidence of being educated up to the secondary school level. He further stated that this is unlike the other requirement of Secondary School Certificate or its equivalent or Grade II Teachers Certificate, or City and Guilds Certificateunder Paragraphs(a) of the definition. The difference between (a) and (b)above is that under (a), production of a Certificate is mandatory. In (b), what is required is evidence of “education up to Secondary School Certificate level”. While it may well be that production of a Certificate is evidence which proves(b), it is not the only mode of proving(b). Testimonials, Reference Letters and Affidavits are legitimate vehicles of proof that a candidate has been “educated up to Secondary School Certificate level.“As a matter of fact, the (d)part of the above definition is much more elastic and accommodating. It recognizes “any other qualification acceptable to the Independent National Electoral Commission as a qualification to contest election to the office of President and other elective posts. It suffices to state that a candidate who relies on (c) must also produce his/her primary school leaving certificate.
He further stated that the provision of Section 318(1) was construed by the Court of Appeal in the case of BAYO v. NJIDDA (2004) 8 NWLR (Pt. 876) page 544 at 629H-630D, where Ogbuagu, J.C.A (as he then was) held: “The above provisions, are conjunctive and they qualify or mean “school certificate or its equivalent.” So, if any one of them is not present/ available, then, the candidate is out. Therefore, even if (i), (ii), (iii) and (d) are acceptable by or satisfactory to INEC and therefore, cannot be questioned in a tribunal as being final, the absence of (c), also disqualifies the candidate.
In the case of (c), he must in the first instance possess, primary six school leaving certificate or its equivalent, (in some states there used to be primary 7 as the final class in Primary school), and in addition evidence of (i), (ii) and (iii) above all together AND that it follows that a person who is not educated up to school certificate or its equivalent, may still qualify for election to the House of Assembly of a state if he has primary six school leaving certificate plus evidence or fulfilling every one of the conditions in (i), (ii) and (iii). If the person possesses primary six certificate but fails to provide evidence of any of the above (i), (ii) or (iii), he does not qualify.
The Learned Silk futher quipped that the definition Section (Section 318(1)) also vests INEC with powers to determine a candidate’s literacy level. Under Paragraph (b), the capacity in which a candidate served in the private or public sector must be acceptable to INEC. The courses and training attended by a candidate must also be in Institutions acceptable to INEC. Finally, a candidate’s ability to read, write, understand and communicate in the English language must also be to the satisfaction of INEC.
He also submitted that the key words in the definition Section are “acceptable”to and “satisfaction” of INEC. These words are subjective in the sense that where INEC is satisfied with a candidates training and qualifications or where the qualifications of a candidate are acceptable to INEC, it is doubtful if the decision of INEC can be challenged successfully by a candidate’s opponent. The words “to the satisfaction of” and“acceptable to”, in their ordinary grammatical meanings, acknowledge subjectivity on the part of INEC. The word acceptable is synonymous with being in agreement with, approval, not very good but good enough, welcoming, pleasing, satisfactory, adequate or worth accepting. Satisfaction means a state of being satisfied, that which satisfies, content or pleasing.
From the Angle of Law of Estoppel,the Learned silk further submitted that where INEC has previously been satisfied with or accepted a candidate’s educational qualifications in previous Elections, and allows such a candidate to contest election(s) the same INEC would be estopped from disqualifying the same candidate in future Elections on the ground of lack of educational qualification.
He further submitted that Estoppel prevents a person from blowing hot and cold, approbating and reprobating on an issue. Therefore, where a person makes a representation expecting it to be acted upon, and another person acts on that representation, the former is estopped from resiling from his/her representation. He cited the positions of the law in :
1.Ude v Nwara (1993) 2 NWLR (Pt. 278) Pg. 638 at 662, Para.G -PerNnaemeka-Agu J.S.C:where the court held. that “By operation of the rule of estoppel a man is not allowed to blow hot and cold, to affirm at one time and deny at the other, or, as it is said, to approbate and reprobate. He cannot be allowed to mislead another person into believing in a state of affairs and then turning round to say to that person’s disadvantage that the state of affairs which he had represented does not exist at all or as represented by him.”
2. Jadesimi v Okotie-Eboh; In Re Lessey (1989) 4 NWLR Pt 113 Pg 113 at 125, Para. B – Per Akpata J.C.A.: “A party cannot be heard to approbate or reprobate. He will not be allowed to base his action or defence, whether by pleadings or affidavit evidence, on a set of facts then depart from the set of facts on which issues had been joined to meet the case of the other side.”
He further concluded that It is evident from Section 131 (d), read along with Section 318 (1) of the Constitution, that a candidate need not produce a Secondary School Certificate or its equivalent Certificate in order to be qualified to contest election into the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria or any other elective post. Candidates who are educated up to Secondary School Certificate level are qualified to contest Elections under the 1999 Constitution. Persons with Primary Six School Leaving Certificate or its equivalent, provided they satisfy the other requirements listed under Paragraph (c)(i), (ii), and (iii) of the definition of “School Certificate or its equivalent” in Section 318 (1), are also qualified to contest election into elective offices, including that of the President and that persons with “any other qualification acceptable to the Independent National Electoral Commission” are also qualified to contest election under Paragraph (d) of the definition Sectionset out above.
In Conclusion on his position ,he submitted that the elasticity of the definition of “School Certificate or its equivalent” in Section 318 (1) of the Constitution may be questioned against the backdrop of providing a Platform for candidates who lack sound educational background to aspire to elective offices, in a Nation which prides itself with aspirants with sound educational qualifications.The said provision can also be questioned on the ground of the enormous power vested in INEC with regard to being satisfied with a candidate’s educational qualification or the educational institutions/qualifications being acceptable to INEC.
(to be continued shortly....)
No comments:
Post a Comment