All Nigeria Peoples Party & Anor V. Godwin Ojo Osiyi & Ors (2008)
LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report
OYEBISI F. OMOLEYE, J. C. A.
This is an appeal against the judgment of the Governorship and Legislative Houses Election Tribunal sitting in Lokoja, Kogi State delivered on the 9th day of October, 2007.
The facts of this case briefly are that on 28/4/07, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) the 2nd Respondent conducted a general election into the House of Assembly of Kogi State.
At the end of the voting exercise and after the results were compiled, Godwin Ojo Osiyi candidate of the Peoples Democratic party (PDP) was declared as the winner and returned as the Member of the House of Assembly representing the Ogari / Magongo Constituency, Kogi State.
The 2nd Appellant Engineer Cornelius Elegbe – Soje alleged that he was the candidate validly nominated by the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) 1st Appellant but that he was unlawfully excluded from participating in that regard by INEC the 2nd Respondent. Aggrieved by this, the Appellants filed a petition before the trial Tribunal on 15/5/07 praying in summation for the following reliefs:
(a) that the 1st: Respondent’s purported election and return as the member of the House of Assembly, Kogi State representing the Ogori / Magongo Constituency was void;
(b) an order directing the 2nd – 4th – Respondent Its to conduct a Bye- Election into the office of member, House of Assembly, Kogi State for Ogori / Magongo Constituency and
(c) an order directing the 2nd Respondent to include the name of the 2nd Appellant as the candidate of the 1st Appellant in the list of candidates who are to participate in the Bye – Election.
In proof of their claim, the Appellants called two witnesses and tendered Exhibits A & B in evidence. In denial of the Appellants’ claim, the Respondents called two witnesses and tendered in evidence Exhibits C, R1, R2 and R3. In accordance with the provisions of paragraphs 5(11) (12), (13) and (14) of the Practice Directions, 2007, parties exchanged their written addresses and adopted them appropriately”
At the conclusion of evidence, the trial Tribunal in its judgment which was delivered on 9/10/2007 held that the 2nd Appellant not having been validly nominated by the 1st Appellant, he was not unlawfully excluded from the said election. The petition of the Appellants was consequently dismissed.
Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the Appellants filed their Notice and Grounds of Appeal on 30/10/07. The Notice and Grounds of appeal containing four grounds of appeal are at pages 225 to 230 of the record of appeal. The learned counsel for the Appellants in the brief of argument filed for the Appellants on 23/11/07 formulated four issues from the four grounds of appeal for the determination of this appeal. These issues read:
- Whether the learned trial Tribunal properly directed itself when it rejected the list of nominated candidates of the 1st Appellant which included the r Appellant’s name?
2, Whether the trial Tribunal made a correct assessment of the evidence led by the parties especially Exhibit B?
- Whether the trial Tribunal properly directed itself as to the burden of proof, having regard to the nature of the issues placed before it in particular Exhibit B?
- Whether the 2nd Appellant had the locus standi to jointly with the 1st Appellant present the petition?
On the other part, the 1st Respondent’s learned counsel in the brief of argument filed for the 1st Respondent on 23/1/08 raised two issues for the resolution of this appeal. The issues are:
(i) Whether the trial Tribunal was right in holding that the 2nd Appellant was not competent under the Electoral Act 2006 to present the petition?
Leave a Reply