THE PRINCIPLE OF STARE DECISIS:A REVIEW OF MANASSEH V GOSHWE

Abstract

Courts of law in Nigeria are duty bound to uphold or follow the ossified legal principles or precedents that have been set by superior courts. This is known as judicial precedent or the principle of stare decisis, which is to the effect that subordinate courts are bound by the decisions of superior courts. The Supreme Court of Nigeria, being the apex court, sets the case law or judicial precedents by which subordinate courts are bound. It is pertinent to state that the Court of Appeal is the penultimate (appellate) court, below which there are same-level courts or courts of concurrent jurisdiction such as the Federal High Court, the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, the High Court of States, the Customary Court of Appeal of the Federal Capital Territory, the Customary Court of Appeal of the States, the Sharia Court of Appeal of the Federal Capital Territory and the Sharia Court of Appeal of the States. Having said this, it should be added that when it comes to election petitions, which are by their very nature sui generis, there are two Election Tribunals in the States of the Federation: The Governorship Election Tribunal and the National and State Houses of Assembly Election Tribunal. This paper examines the 2023 Plateau State Governorship Election scenario, as it relates to the decision of the Governorship Election Tribunal, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court in the case of Manasseh v Goshwe. There is no gainsaying that stare decisis is geared toward ensuring predictability in the adjudication process, in the sense that, at every given time, there should be no doubt as to both the content of the law and the application of the law. Subordinate courts and tribunals should follow precedents laid by superior courts.