LSP055: Changing/Correction of Names in Nigeria

Names are perhaps the easiest and fundamental means of identifying an individual. The rationale behind it is to distinguish one individual from another since no two persons can have exact names.

Given at birth, it runs from cradle till death unless there are instances that call for a change of name. The law recognises instances for a change or correction of name.

Over time, the changing of names in Nigeria involves bilateral processes. The deponent or maker has to swear an affidavit stating the intention to change or correct his name. An affidavit is simply a written statement of fact that is signed under an oath in presence of an official recognised authority such as a Solicitor, a Notary of the Public, Justice of the Peace, or Commissioner of Oath, etc.

Once this has been done, the maker of the affidavit is to publish the notice of change of name in a national newspaper. This is to ensure the general public becomes aware of the change in name and subsequent correspondence or interaction should reflect the new name.

However in a recent case of PDP & Ors v Degi- Eremienyo & Ors (2020) LPELR-49734(SC), the federal high court Judge, I.E Ekwo held that “the affidavit of correction and confirmation of name does not in his opinion, conform to the proper manner of changing a name or correcting a name on a certificate and that it is only by deed poll, and not by mere deposition that a name on an official certificate can be effected and further that the procedure necessarily affects official record and archives of the nation. That is after the deed poll that the deponent approaches the Nigerian Civil Registry to have the change published in the official gazette. None of these procedures had been done by the 1st respondent.”

From this, the law is one cannot change or correct one’s name by swearing an affidavit and publishing change of name in a newspaper. One can only change or correct your name by a Deed poll, and then proceed to the Nigerian Civil Registry to have it published in an official gazette. This principle held by the federal high court was accepted by the supreme court.

Furthermore, the difference between an affidavit of and a deed of poll is that while the former has to be witnessed by a recognised authority, the latter is to be witnessed by two adults who should not be related to the maker. But the two processes have the same legal effects – that is, changing one’s name. This is the summary of this recent case. Simple and straightforward!

IS THERE ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE ON THIS CASE?
Moving on, if the judgment is viewed from another perspective and read in context, then it seems that this case did not establish a new principle but only extended the practice of changing of name to include A PUBLICATION IN AN OFFICIAL GAZETTE. This perspective is further strengthened provided that the main difference between an affidavit and a deed of poll, mentioned in the preceding paragraph, did not come into play and emphasis was just on the effects. In fact, in the case under review, the crux of the suit was not on the publication of the changed name, it was on the falsity of the names in which the 1st respondent claimed to have changed.

In that case, the names the respondent bear at each stage of his life were fraught with lots of inconsistencies and falsity. Instances are:
•The name in his First School Leaving Certificate issued in 1976 Degi, Biobragha.
•His WAEC/GCE, 1984 bears the name Adegi Brokumo.
•His first degree bears the name- Degi Biobarakuma Wangawa.
•In his affidavit of correction and confirmation of name sworn to on 9 August 2018, he asserted that his correct name is Biobarakuma Degi.
•In another affidavit of regularisation of name sworn to on 18 September 2018, he averred that his correct name is Biobarakuma Wanagha Degi Eremienyo.

Based on this, the Supreme Court justice, Ejembi Eko held that the respondent had told a lie and his inconsistencies portrayed a chameleon nature. The consequence of this is that the Court had to invoke section 31(6) of the Electoral Act to cancel the 1st respondent, and consequently the 2nd respondent’s victory in the Bayelsa governorship election and then made another candidate who came second in the governorship election, the governor of the state. This is irrespective that the 1st respondent, nominated as a deputy governor, was the one who gave fraudulent details, and not the 2nd respondent who was the Governor-elect.

As a corollary, it has always been the law that a person’s name and initials must be constant and consistent as the rising and the setting of the sun. The Supreme Court reiterated this fact with more emphasis in the case of Titilayo Plastic Ind. Ltd v. Fagbola (2019) LPELR-SC.205/2004. where the Apex Court held that “the exact names used for professional purposes must be the same used in an official capacity or else render such documents defective and not a mere misnomer.”

As such, it could mean once an affidavit for a change of name has been sworn, the maker then proceeds to the Nigerian Civil Registry to get it published rather than just publishing it in a national newspaper. This of course would be valid provided that an affidavit for a change of name and a deed of poll can be used interchangeably while still retaining the legal effect. If not, then the practice of changing name through an affidavit is no longer the law and henceforth, only a deed of poll can be used.

In conclusion, the writer posits that a prospective individual who wishes to change or correct his name should employ the service of a lawyer.

Thank you for reading. See you next week😚