ELECTION LAW — Pre-Election Matters — Delay in Challenging Substitution — Effect on Justiciability
Ratio Decidendi
Per MUNTAKA-COOMASSIE, JSC, in Hassan v. Aliyu & Ors (2010) NLC-123-170-2009(SC) at p. 36; Paras A-C:
"Where the candidate who was substituted did not take any step to seek redress before the election took place, and a candidate declared as the winner, and thereafter seeks to be declared as the winner of the election, it is my view that the matter is no longer pre-election matter. That is his right to pursue a pre-election matter ceases after the holding of the election except only, if the action is instituted before the holding of the election."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that a substituted candidate who delays seeking redress until after the election loses the right to pursue a pre-election matter. The right to pursue such matters ceases after the election unless the action was instituted before the election. The principle applies in election disputes involving candidate substitution. It ensures that pre-election matters are resolved before elections. The principle reflects the need for timely challenges. It prevents post-election challenges to pre-election decisions. The court must determine when the action was instituted. The principle provides guidance on the timing of pre-election challenges.