Aisha Jummai Alahassan & Anor V. Mr. Darius Dickson Ishaku & Ors (2016)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

OLABODE RHODES-VIVOUR, J.S.C.

On 11 February 2016, your lordships heard and dismissed this appeal for reasons to be given on 22 February 2016. These are the reasons that led me to that conclusion.

THE FACTS ARE THESE

On 11 and 25 April 2015 the 3rd Respondent, the regulatory body charged with the conduct of elections in Nigeria conducted election for the office of Governor of Taraba State. There were eleven candidates at that election. The 1st Appellant, sponsored by the 2nd Appellant, and the 1st Respondent sponsored by the 2nd Respondent were candidates at the election. The 1st Respondent was declared the winner of the election with a score of 369,318votes, while the 1st Appellant came in second with 275,984 votes. The 1st Appellant and her party, the 2nd Appellant, were not satisfied with the outcome of the election, and so they filed a petition. The other candidates were satisfied with the outcome of the election.

The Grounds of the Petition are:

(a) That the 1st Respondent was at the time of the election, not qualified to contest for the Office of Governor of Taraba State, having not

1

been sponsored by a political party, a condition precedent prescribed under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,1999 (as amended)

(b) That the election and return of 1st Respondent was invalid by reason of substantial non compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) and Approved Guidelines and Regulations for the conduct of 2015 General Elections and Manual for Election Officials 2015 which non-compliance substantially affected the result of theelection.

See also  Chief Uriah Akpana Adomba & Ors. V. Benjamin Odiese & Ors (1990) LLJR-SC

(c) That the election and return of 1st Respondent was invalid by reason of corrupt practices which vitiated the election.

(d) That contrary to result declared by 3rd Respondent, the 1st petitioner indeed won majority of lawful votes cast and satisfied the mandatory constitutional threshold and spread across the local government areas of Taraba State and ought to have been declared winner and returned as the duly elected Governor of Taraba State at the 11 April and 25 April 2015 election.

The Petitioners prayed for the following:

  1. That it may be determined that the 1st Respondent was at the time of the election having failed to meet the

2 constitutional requirement of being sponsored by a political party.

  1. That it may be determined that the return of the 1st Respondent as the Governor of Taraba State in the election held on 11 and 25 April, 2015 is void for corrupt practices and substantial non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended).
  2. That it may be determined that the 1st Respondent was not duly elected or returned in the pulling units complained of in Ardo-Kola, Bali, Donga, Ibbi, Jalongo, Karim Lamido, Kurme, Lau Takum, Ussa, Wukari, Yorro and Zing Local Governments of Taraba State by majority of lawful votes cast at the Governorship election held on 11 and 25 April, 2015.
  3. That it may be determined that the 1st Petitioner scored the majority of lawful votes cast in the election held on 11 and 25 April, 2015 and satisfied the constitutional requirement and is entitled to be returned by the 3rd Respondent as having been duly elected Governor of Taraba State in the election held on 11 and 25 April, 2015.
See also  Nabisco Inc Vs Allied Biscuits Company Ltd. (1990) LLJR-SC

The Petitioners ask for the following reliefs:

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *