Alhaji Umaru Musa Yar’adua V. Alhaji Sa’idu Barda & Ors (1992)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

MOHAMMED, J.C.A.

This is an appeal from the decision of the Governorship and Legislative Houses Election Tribunal sitting at Katsina. Following a nationwide gubernatorial election which took place on the 14th December, 1991, the 1st respondent, who contested under the platform of the National Republican Convention (NRC), was declared the winner, having scored a total of 290,615 votes. The appellant contested the election against the 1st respondent under the platform of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and scored a total of 277,999 votes.

Dissatisfied with the declaration that the 1st respondent is the winner, the appellant filed his petition before the Governorship and Legislative Houses Election Tribunal and relied on the following grounds:

1. The Petitioner, Alhaji Umaru Musa Yar’ Adua is a person who was a candidate at the above election and claims to have had a right to be returned or elected at the above election.
2. Your Petitioner states that the election was held on the 14th day of December, 1991 when the Petitioner and Alhaji Saidu Barda, the 1st Respondent were candidates and on the 15th day of December, 1991 the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Respondents declared that 1st Respondent received 29061 3 votes and that the Petitioner received 277999 votes and the 1st Respondent was declared to be duly elected.
3. The Petitioner avers that the 1st Respondent was not duly elected by a majority of lawful votes at the election.
4. The 1st Respondent obtained an apparent and colourable majority over the petitioner Alhaji Umaru Musa Yar ‘Adua whereas in truth and in fact your said Petitioner had a majority of lawful votes of the electors in Katsina State who voted at the said elections and who were at the time thereof duly qualified by law to vote and was duly elected as the Governor of Katsina State and ought to have been so returned.
5. The Petitioner avers that the votes cast at the said election were not correctly added up or counted at the Ward, Local Government and State Collating Centres in that the figures added up at the Collating Centres were either not those actually recorded at the Polling Stations or they were not based upon correct figures of actual votes at the polling station. Particulars will be supplied after Discovery.
6. Votes cast at a number of Polling Stations where the total number of votes cast exceeded the total number of persons accredited to vote at those polling Stations and which votes ought therefore to have been nullified or cancelled were wrongly added and counted for both parties.
7. Of the votes cast in the following Local Governments there should have been nullified the following number of votes out of the respective figures credited to the Petitioner and the 1st Respondent:-

LOCAL GOVERNMENT Petitioner 1st Respondent

1. Daura 6 89
2. Batsari 204 456
3. Ingawa 23 101
4. Kankia 170 354
5. Danja 170 637
6. Bakori 166 257
7. Safana 61 304
8. Katsina 103 670
9. Jibiya 36 160
10. Batagarawa 107 257
11. Rimi 254 642
12. Kaita – 15
13. Mashi 214 231
14. Musawa 62 96
15. Malumfashi 261 394
16. Kankara 157 742
17. Kafur 11 128
18. Funtua 257 634
19. Faskari 61 238
20. Matazu 129 300
21. Mani 119 137
22. Bindawa 56 227

Total 2,627 7,069

8. The Petitioner says that unless the context otherwise admits all reference hereinafter made to the total number of votes scored by the Petitioner and the 1st Respondent should be read subject always to the deduction of the respective number of votes which the Petitioner contends in paragraphs 6 and 7 ought to have been cancelled in computing the respective number of votes scored by each party.
9. The actual votes scored by the Petitioner in Mani Local Government is 13,231 votes based on the actual votes scored by him at various Polling Centres and it is these same figures that ought to have been transmitted from the Local Government Collating Centre to the State Level Returning Officer. The Petitioner has since discovered that the figures which were transmitted from Local Government Collating Centres to the State Level Returning Officer were as follows:-

Petitioner – 10,784 votes

1st Respondent – 8,380 votes

In collating the final result for the state, the figures used by the state Level Returning Officer were:-

Petitioner – 8.077 votes

1st Respondent – 6,657 votes

In other words the Petitioner’s majority of 4.985 votes was reduced to 1,420 votes.

10. In computing the final figures for the State results the 4th Respondent used the following declared figures for the Petitioner and the 1st Respondent in respect of the votes in the following Local Governments.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT Petitioner 1st Respondent

1. Zango 21,659 14,735
2. Mai’aduwa 6,879 3,663
3. Kurfi 9,002 7,778
4. Daura 8,877 (6) 6,881 (89)
5. Batsari 10,721 (204) 9,321 (456)
6. Ingawa 16,874 (23) 10,132 (101)
7. Kankia 10,409 (170) 9,196 (354)
8. Danja 10,131 (170) 9,627 (637)
9. Bakori 13,948 (166) 10,849 (257)

The Petitioner does not dispute these results subject however to the averments contained in paragraphs 6 and 7 hereof (The figures in bracket represent the number of votes which ought to have been cancelled or nullified).

11. However in computing the final figures for the State Gubernatorial Elections the State Level Returning Officer, the 4th Respondent used the following figures as the results of the collation exercise at Local Government level for the Petitioner and the 1st Respondent respectively and declared the result of the Gubernatorial elections as the sum total of the said figures and those set out in paragraph 10 above.

Local Government Petitioner 1st Respondent