Bala Kokani Kebbe V. Garba Aliyu Maitumbi & Anor (1999)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

ONNOGHEN, J.C.A.

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Local Government Election Tribunal, Sokoto State holden at Sokoto delivered on 8th February 1999.

The facts of the case are that on the 5th day of December 1998, the 2nd respondent conducted an election to the office of Chairman, Kebbi Local Government Council of Sokoto State. The appellant and 1st respondent contested that election on the platforms of Peoples Democratic Party and All Peoples Party respectively. At the end of the exercise, 2nd respondent declared the 1st respondent as the duly elected Chairman of Kebbi Local Government Council as a result of which the appellant who felt aggrieved filed an election petition before the aforementioned tribunal.

After trial, the tribunal, in a considered judgment delivered on 8th February 1999, dismissed the appellant’s petition.

Dissatisfied with the said judgment, the appellant appealed to this court vide a notice and grounds of appeal filed on 10th February 1999 – see page 67 of record.

The said notice of appeal contains seven grounds of appeal out of which learned counsel for the appellant, Jacob Ochidi Esq., formulated three issues for determination, viz.-

(1) What is the proper order to make when the tribunal discovered that the results of election declared at S/Ruwa polling station 04 and Zugu polling station were inflated.

(2) Was the lower tribunal correct in law when it validated the result declared at Jigawa polling station despite having observed and held that the entries made on the statement of result sheet contains wrong entries and are unreliable.

(3) Was the tribunal correct in law to have validated the result declard at S/Ruwa polling station 03 when the result sheet showed the 297 ballot papers issued out to voters at the said polling station counsel not be accounted for?

In arguing issue No. 1 learned counsel for the appellant, Jacob Ochidi Esq., submitted that the tribunal having found as a fact at page 57 lines 22 to 8 that they agreed with learned counsel, Mr. Ochidi, “that from the entries in Exhibit F, there are 4 unexplained votes”, the tribunal agreed that the votes were inflated by 4 and that the result declared is not authentic and urged that the result or that polling station ought to have been nullified and that and the scores of each candidate at the polling station deducted from the overall result of each candidate. He then urged this court to act accordingly.

The same submission was made in respect of the findings of the tribunal in respect of 3 votes at Zugu polling station as shown on Exhibit D; Sabon Birnin II polling station etc; etc.

On issue No.2, learned counsel referred to page 63 of the record lines 15 – 36 and submitted that the lower tribunal speculated un the issue of the missing 239 ballot papers and urged us to hold that the result declared for Jigawa polling station is therefore unreliable and ought to have been rejected by the lower tribunal.

He then urged us to deduct the respective scores of the candidates and declare the appellant the winner, with lawful votes.

On issue No.3 (which learned counse1 erroneously referred to in his brief of argument as No.4) he went back to the election at S/Ruwa polling station where it was found as a fact that 297 ballot papers were unaccounted for. He then submitted that the 297 ballot papers were suppressed since they were not accounted for in the result. He then urged us to deduct the scores of the candidates recorded in this polling station and declare the appellant the winner