LEGAL PRINCIPLE: STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – Retrospective Legislation – Express Words in Some Sections Contrasted with Silence in Others
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The expressions used in the statute must be capable of having such effect. This is the case with Section 4 of the Edict which reads: 'Notwithstanding that the appointment of a person as an Oba has been approved by the Executive Council but that such person so appointed is not or has not been presented with the instrument of appointment or staff of office in respect thereof such person shall function as such and have all the rights and privileges of an Oba.' The italicised words show that the provision applies not only to the future but to past failure to present instrument of appointment or staff of office. The same cannot be said of Sections 1 and 2.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ogundare, JSC, in Adesanoye & Ors v. Adewole & Anor (2000) NLC-361998(SC) at pp. 34–35; Paras D–A.
"The expressions used in the statute must be capable of having such effect. This is the case with Section 4 of the Edict which reads: 'Notwithstanding that the appointment of a person as an Oba has been approved by the Executive Council but that such person so appointed is not or has not been presented with the instrument of appointment or staff of office in respect thereof such person shall function as such and have all the rights and privileges of an Oba.' The italicised words show that the provision applies not only to the future but to past failure to present instrument of appointment or staff of office. The same cannot be said of Sections 1 and 2."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Where a statute uses expressly retrospective language in some sections but not in others, the contrast indicates legislative intent. Words like “has not been presented” (present perfect) encompass past failures and demonstrate clear retrospective operation. Conversely, sections lacking such temporal indicators are presumed prospective. This principle of construction respects that the legislature chooses language deliberately; express retrospectivity in some provisions implies its absence where omitted. Courts will not imply retrospective effect where the legislature has not manifested such intent through clear temporal language.