Abbas Abdullahi Machika V. Shehu Inuwa Imam & Ors (2010)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

The Appellant and the 1st Respondent among others, were candidates who contested the election held on the 21/4/2007 at the Faskari/Kankara/Sabuwa Federal Constituency of Katsina State for a seat in the House of Representatives.

The Appellant was sponsored by the All Nigerian Peoples’ Party (ANPP) while the 1st Respondent contested the election, conducted by the 3rd Respondent on the platform of the 2nd Respondent. At the end of the election, the 3rd Respondent declared and returned the 1st Respondent as the winner and being dissatisfied with the said return, the Appellant presented an election petition before the Katsina State National Assembly Election Tribunal, sitting at Katsina questioning it (Henceforth to be call the tribunal).

The main ground relied on by the Appellant in support of his petition is contained in paragraph 5 (A) thereof which is as follows:-

“5. (A) The 1st Respondent was, at the time of the election, not qualified to contest the said election.

However in the alternative to the above ground, the Appellant had averred in paragraph 5 (B) of the petition thus:-

“5. (B) The election was invalid by reason of non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2006 or by reason of Corrupt Practice.”

The two (2) grounds are provided for in section 145 (1) (a) and (b) respectively of the Electoral Act, 2006 to be hereafter called the Act.

After a trial of the petition, the tribunal delivered a judgment on the 16/4/2008 dismissing it and this appeal notice of which was filed on the 15/5/2008, is the result of the grievance by the Appellant against that decision.

The Notice of Appeal contained twenty-six (26) grounds of dissatisfaction with the dismissal of the petition from which ten (10) issues were formulated in the Appellants’ brief of argument dated the 18th and filed on the 19/9/2008.

Though the issues appear prolix, because there is a notice of preliminary objection on the competence some of them along with grounds from which they were raised, it is expedient to set them as they appear in the Appellant’s brief.

They are as follows:-

2.1 Whether considering the conduct of the Tribunal in the handing of this petition, the Petitioner has not been denied fair hearing?

Grounds 1 and 26.