PRINCIPLE STATEMENT

A specific request requires a specific answer; inference, analogy, or answer by implication will not meet the requirement that the termination of the appointment must be by the appropriate authority.

RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)

Per Olatawura, JSC, in Federal Capital Development Authority v. Sule (1994) NLC-2841990(SC) at p. 11; Para B.
A specific request requires a specific answer. Inference or analogy or answer by implication will not meet the requirement that the termination of the appointment ... must be by the appropriate authority."
View Judgment

EXPLANATION / SCOPE

When statutes require approval or authorization by specific authorities for actions like termination, only express approval from the designated authority suffices. Implied approval, approval by analogy, or approval from non-designated authorities is insufficient. If the statute requires Presidential approval for termination, only express Presidential approval (not approval by a minister, or implied approval from Presidential silence) satisfies the requirement. This strictness serves: ensuring accountability (the designated authority must actually decide), preventing circumvention of procedural protections, and maintaining the statutory scheme. The principle protects employees from termination without proper authorization. Where specific request for approval is made, only specific, express response from the appropriate authority validates the action. This prevents authorities from acting without proper authorization or inferring approval where none was expressly given.

CASES APPLYING THIS PRINCIPLE