Migultenne v. The Attorney General – sllr 1996 volume 1 page 408

In the case between Migultenne (Appellant) and the Attorney-General (Respondent), the court addressed the interpretation of sections 106 and 107 of the 1972 Constitution, focusing on whether the appointments and dismissals of state officers are governed by unfettered executive discretion—known as the “pleasure principle”—and thus immune from judicial review. It was determined that rules enacted under section 106(3) constitute subordinate legislation and cannot curtail the absolute authority vested in the executive under section 107(1). The ouster clause was examined and found effective in excluding judicial intervention in matters of appointment and dismissal unless otherwise expressly provided. The appeal was dismissed, reaffirming the constitutional principle that the President’s power i