LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – Interpretation of Constitution – Principles Governing Interpretation
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Such interpretation as would serve the interest of the Constitution and best carry out its object and purpose should be preferred. Its relevant provisions must be read together and not dis-jointly and where the words of any section are clear and unambiguous, they must be given their ordinary meaning unless this would lead to absurdity or be in conflict with other provisions of the Constitution.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Tinubu v. I.M.B. Securities Plc (2001) NLC-322001(SC) at p. 9; Paras A–B.
"Such interpretation as would serve the interest of the Constitution and best carry out its object and purpose should be preferred. Its relevant provisions must be read together and not dis-jointly and where the words of any section are clear and unambiguous, they must be given their ordinary meaning unless this would lead to absurdity or be in conflict with other provisions of the Constitution."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Constitutional interpretation prefers constructions that serve the Constitution’s interest and best carry out its object and purpose. Relevant provisions must be read together, not dis-jointly (in isolation). Clear and unambiguous words are given their ordinary meaning unless absurdity or conflict with other provisions results. This approach balances textual fidelity with purposive construction. The Constitution is a living instrument, not an ordinary statute. The court must avoid interpretations that defeat constitutional objectives. Reading provisions together ensures harmony and coherence. The ordinary meaning rule yields when absurdity would result. The purpose is to give effect to the Constitution’s intentions, not to frustrate them.
