Dandyson R. Uku & Anor V. Augustine Ngo & Ors (1999)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

NSOFOR, J.C.A.

The petitioner (appellant) was one of the candidates in the Governorship and Legislative Houses elections conducted throughout the Federation of Nigeria on the 9th of January, 1999 by Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC for short) a statutory body charged with the conduct of the elections.

The petitioner and the 1st Respondent had each contested the seat in the Rivers State House of Assembly for Abua/Odual Constituency. The 1st Respondent contested the election under the platform of All Peoples Party (APP). The petitioner contested under the platform of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

At the end of the election exercise, the results of the polls as declared by the 3rd Respondent, an official of INEC who participated in the conduct of the elections showed that (i) the petitioner scored 29,986 votes and, (ii) the 1st Respondent scored 49,180 votes. Accordingly, the 3rd Respondent returned the 1st Respondent as having been elected.

The Petitioner was not satisfied with the declaration and the return of the 1st Respondent. Dissatisfied, he therefore, presented a petition to the Governorship and Legislative Houses Elections Tribunal (hereinafter to be referred to simply as the Tribunal for short) holden in Port Harcourt challenging the return of the 1st Respondent by the 3rd Respondent.

The ground for the challenge as pleaded in paragraph 3 of the petition was:

“the 1st Respondent was not duly elected by majority of valid votes at the election: or, in the alternative, that the election in wards 1,9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 were voided by corrupt practices and or the elections in those wards were not conducted in compliance with the provisions of Decree No.3 of 1999”

Accordingly, he sought for the following reliefs:-

“Wherefore the Petitioner prays the Honourable Tribunal to

(a) Cancel the results of the elections in wards 1,9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 of the Abua/Odual Legislative House Consistuency for electoral malpractices, or in the alternative, that the election in those wards was not conducted in accordance with Decree No.3 of 1999.

(b) Declare the 1st Respondent not duly elected by a majority of lawful votes cast in the election.

(c) Declare the Petitioner as the winner of the Legislative House for Abua/Odual Legislative House Constituency based on the results of the seven wards were (sic) valid votes were cast, and the Petitioner as elected, or in the alternative, declare the election inconclusive”.

The 1st Respondent had filed a Reply to the petition. Similarly, the 2nd to the 5th Respondents filed a joint Reply to the petition. And the Petitioner further filed an Answer to the 1st Respondent’s Reply. At the close of the pleadings, the case came on before the Tribunal for trial. A full scale trial started on the 12th of March, 1999.

At the conclusion of all the evidence – oral and documentary – and due to time constraint, the Tribunal adjourned for judgment, the counsel engaged in the trial having waived their right to make final addresses, oral or written.