Mansir Aminu V. Aliyu Ahmed & 22 Ors. (2008)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

ABUBAKAR ABDULKADIR JEGA, J.C.A.

This is an appeal by the Appellant against the judgment of the Governorship and legislative Houses election petition Tribunal delivered on the 25th day of july 2007 by which the petition of the Appellant was dismissed.

The facts of this appeal are stated thus:-

The Appellant brought his petition No. HA/EPT/KTS/S/07 dated the 11th day of May, 2007 but filed on the 14th day of May, 2007 against the result of the House of Assembly Election conducted by the 23rd Respondent (INEC) on 14th day of April into the Katsina State House of Assembly in Bakori Constituency wherein the 1st Respondent was declared winner and returned as such by the 3rd respondent having scored a total votes of 18,017 as against the Appellant who scored a total of 17,652 votes.

The appellants complaint is against the result of only one out of the eleven (11) wards that made of Bakori Constituency i.e. the Appellants complaint relate solely to the result of the 14th day of April 2007 House of Assembly Election in the Barde/Kwantakwaram ward of Bakori constituency where the Appellant alleged that there was falsification or alteration of election result.

The Barde/Kwantakwaram ward where the appellant alleged that there was falsification of result is made up of (18) eighteen polling units or stations. Consequent to the above complaint the appellant prayed the Governorship/Legislative Houses Election Tribunal sitting in Katsina, Katsina State for the following reliefs.

a. That the actual results contained on Forms EC8A from the 18 aforesaid polling stations be re collated .

b. That the petitioner be returned or declared winner of the 14th April 2007 election to the State House of Assembly.

c. That the petitioner be declared to have majority of lawful votes cast at Barde/Kwantakwaram ward election to the House of 14th April, 2007.

The Appellant in proof of this case tendered exhibits p1-p7 and called only one witness (PW1) Dan Asabe Bako (the PDP Agent for Barde/Kwantakwaram Ward). The 1st Respondent alone testified in his defence, while the 2nd -23rd Respondents did not call any witness.

The Tribunal in its delivered on the 25th day of July, 2007 dismissed the Appellant’s petition on the basis that the allegation of falsification or alteration of result of the Barde/Kwantakwaram ward election had not been proved beyond reasonable doubt in accordance with S. 138 (1) of the Evidence Act as most of the documents relied upon were either blank or the figures recorded on them too faint that it will not be possible to read them correctly and same cannot be identified as they are not manifest on the result sheet. In other electoral forms tendered as exhibits by the Appellant there were glaring discrepancies that to collate the result therein is simply impossible. The Tribunal consequently held that by virtue of S.150 (1) of the Evidence Act LFN 1990 there is a presumption of regularity for an official act shown to have been done in a manner substantially regular.

The appellant being dissatisfied with the judgment filed his notice of appeal dated and filed on the 6th August, 2007 containing three grounds of appeal.

We heard this appeal on the 11th June, 2008, Mr. D. Olaniyan learned counsel for the appellant adopted his brief dated 21/9/07 and filed on 26/9/07 and also his reply brief dated 21/1/08 and filed on 25/1/08 and urged the court to allow the appeal.

Mr. T. Abe learned counsel for the 1st respondent adopted his brief of argument dated 15/10/07 and filed on 16/10/07. The 3rd to 23rd respondents, counsel was not in court to argue his appeal his brief of argument is dated 6/2/08 and filed on 19/2/08. It is deemed argued under order 17 Rule 9 (4) of the court of Appeal Rules 2007.