The State Vs. Jerry Gideon, Judgment Delivered by John Inyang Okoro JSC, In SC/CR/413/2020

Law Reports
-April 10, 2025
- 16 Comments

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

HOLDEN AT ABUJA

ON FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JUNE,2024

BEFORE THEIR LORDSHIPS

JOHN INYANG OKORO.

ADAMU JAURO.

EMMANUEL AKOMAYE AGIM.

OBANDE FESTUS OGBUINYA.

HABEEB ADEWALE OLUMUYIWA ABIRU.

JUSTICE SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

The State.

AND

Jerry Gideon

APPELLANT

RESPONDENT

SC/CR/413/2020

JUDGEMENT DELIVERED BY JOHN INYANG OKOROJSC

I have had a preview of the lead judgment just delivered by my learned brother, Obande Festus Ogbuinya, JSC, and without hesitation, I completely agree with the reasons expatiated to arrive at the conclusion that
the appeal be dismissed.

The position of the law is well-settled that an unsigned copy document is a worthless piece of paper with no probative value. It does not matter whether it was objected to at the point of tendering or, as in this case, during the plea. As long as you a document or court process that is unsigned, it is worthless and does not have any efficacy in law. See Ali vs. State (2021) 12 NWLR (pt.1789) 159; Maku vs. Al-Makura & Ors. (2016) LPELR – 48123 (SC); Conoil vs. Vitol S.A (2018) 9 NWLR (pt. 1625) 463; State vs. Sa’idu (2019) LPELR – 47397 (SC).

In the instant case, the charge prepared by the prosecution upon which the Respondent was arraigned was not signed, thereby robbing the Court of jurisdiction to adjudicate on the matt. The effect is that the case was not initiated by due process of law, thus void ab ignition. The Appellant’s contention that the Respondent’s failure to raise objection timeously to the unsigned charge amount to a waiver of his right to object is nothing but a desperate attempt by a drowning man clutching on every straw available, because parties cannot by consent or otherwise donate or confer jurisdiction on a court where the court
has no jurisdiction to entertain a matter. See Mobil producing Nigeria Unlimited vs. Monokpo ( 2003) 18 NWLR (pt. 852) 346.

Appellant’s failure to sign the charge had ruined the entire proceeding beyond remedy. Consequently, the charge being the foundation upon which the proceeding was based, was non-existent. The entire proceeding became fundamentally defective and crumbled since one cannot put something on nothing and expect it to stand. See U.A.C vs Mcfoy (1962) ACP 152.

In the case of
Kida Vs. Ogunmola (2006) LPELR – 1690 (SC), this Court per Musdapher, JSC
considered the effect of a defective originating process when he said that: “…. the validity of the originating process in a proceeding before a Court is fundamental, as the competence of the proceeding is a condition sine qua non to the legitimacy of any suit. Therefore, the failure to commence proceedings with a valid Writ of Summons goes to the root of the case and any order emanating from such proceeding is liable to be set aside as incompetent and a nullity. It clearly borders on the issue of jurisdiction and the competence of court to adjudicate on the matter…”

The above statement succinctly encapsulates the position of the law regarding a court action commenced with a defective originating process. For the avoidance of doubt, I need to say that a charge is to a criminal trial what a Writ of Summons is to a civil action. They are both originating processes in their respective rights and are the base of the entire proceedings, either civil or criminal.

All I have labored to say here is that the unsigned charge upon which the Respondent was tried and convicted was a worthless piece of paper which did not confer jurisdiction on the court to try him.

To this end, the appeal is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed by me. The decision of the Court of Appeal delivered on 25th March 2020 is hereby affirmed.

Appeal Dismissed.

JOHN INYANG OKORO

JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

APPEARANCES:

Z.Y. Musa, Esq, SSCI, Ministry of Justice, Yola, Adamawa
State, for the Appellant.

S.S Obende, Esq; with him, Simon Wilson, Esq and W.S. Aboki,
Esq, for the Respondent.