Alhaji Shehu Usman Aliyu Yammedi & Anor. V. Alhaji Ahmed Audi Zarewa & Ors. (2009)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

THERESA N. ORJI-ABADUA, J.C.A.

In the Petition No. EPT/KNS/HR/37/07 presented by the Appellants before the Governorship and Legislative Houses Election Tribunal of Kano State sitting at Kano, and particularly, during the Pre-Hearing Session, the 1st and 2nd Respondents therein who are also, the 1st & 2nd Respondents in this appeal, filed an application on Notice praying the said Tribunal for the following orders:-

“1. An Order of the Honourable Tribunal striking out the Parties/Respondents numbered as 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 for not being proper parties known to law before this Honourable Tribunal.

2. An Order of the Honourable Tribunal striking out all the paragraphs of the petition where allegations of fictitious addition of results, stuffing of ballot boxes with already thumb printed ballot papers, statement of results and other forms of electoral malpractices were made in specified Units but the Presiding Officers of such Units were not made parties in the Petition particularly Gwangwan I, Gwangwan II and (A) Rogo Local Government, (F) Ruwan Bago, (H) Zoza, (1) Beli, (L) Karaye Magajin Gari, (M) Unguwar Hajji-Karaye and Kafin Gabga 4 in (N) Kafin Dagba all under grounds/particulars of petition.

3. An Order striking out paragraphs 2(A) (i), (ii), (B), (F), (H), (1), (K), (L) and (M) for having fallen short of the requirements of 4(1) & (d) of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2006 and Order 26 Rule 4(1) of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2000 assimilated by virtue of Paragraph 50 of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2006.

4. An Order of the Honourable Tribunal striking out the Petition on the ground that the remaining grounds cannot sustain the petition.

5. For such further order(s) as this Honourable Tribunal may deem fit to make in the circumstances.”

The said application was predicated on six grounds, that is to say:

“(a) The misjoinder will allow the proper parties before the Honourable Tribunal and narrow down the issues for the early determination of the petition bearing in mind that the petition cannot be amended at this stage.

(b) The Electoral Act does not recognize any officer known as Collation Officer/Supervisory Presiding Officer which are none juristic personality and outside the contemplation of Section 144(2) of the Electoral Act 2006, which said proviso cannot be invoked except where the petition expressly states that the said officials, if known to law, were agents of INEC.

(c) That where INEC allows officers to carry dual functions where there are such stated offices designated and allowed by law, the petition or pleadings will specifically plead same and cannot be inferred where it is not stated.

(d) That the Presiding officers of the Polling Units of Gwangwan I, Gwangwan II under (A) Rogo Local Government, (F) Ruwan Bago, (H) Zoza, (I) Beli, (L) Karaye Magajin Gari, (M) Unguwar Hajji-Karaye and Kafin Gabga II in (N) Kafin Dagba, all under grounds/particulars of petition where allegations of fictitious addition of results, stuffing of ballot boxes with already thumb printed ballot papers, alteration of results and other forms of electoral malpractices, were made are not parties to the petition.

(e) The grounds listed as 2 (A) (i) (ii), (B), (F), (H), (I), (K), (L) and (M) have not complied with the requirements of 4(1) (d) of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act 2006 and Order 26 rule 4(1) of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2000 applicable by virtue of Paragraph 50 of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act 2006, by stating clearly the facts of the petition and grounds upon which the petition is based and pleaded with clarity and precise details the issues for determination as to call upon the Respondents to respond.

(f) The Honourable Tribunal has on several occasions made pronouncements on the above issues and shall be urged to follow their decisions.”