CONSTITUTIONAL LAW ā Null and Void Acts ā Effect on Tenure of Office
Principle Statement
When an appointment is declared null and void, the appointment is deemed never to have been made, and all acts performed by the purported appointee are unlawful and of no effect. Such a declaration cannot be used as a basis to claim an extension of tenure or to compute a term of office.
Ratio Decidendi (Source)
Per Oguntade, JSC (quoting Adefulu v. Okulaja), in Ladoja v. INEC & Ors (2007) NLC-123-120-2007(SC) at pp. 28ā29; Paras DāC.
"When an appointment is declared null and void, all it means is that the appointment was never made and all acts of the purported appointee when he de facto held the appointment are unlawful, null and void and of no effect. ... To grant the 11 months extension sought would... create a situation never contemplated by section 180(2) of the Constitution."
Explanation / Scope
The principle applies to the legal consequences of a void appointment. A declaration of nullity operates retroactively, meaning the appointee is treated as never having held the office in law. Consequently, the period during which the appointee acted de facto cannot count toward the computation of a constitutional tenure, nor can it support a claim for an extension of term. The principle prevents a party from benefiting from an unlawful act. It reinforces the distinction between de jure and de facto officeholders. The court will not rewrite the Constitution or create tenure where none exists. The principle ensures that constitutional provisions on tenure are strictly enforced and not circumvented by reliance on void acts.
