Democratic Peoples Party (DPP) & Anor V. Independent National Electoral Commission & Ors (2) (2008)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

ALI ABUBAKAR BABANDI GUMEL, J.C.A

This is an appeal against the ruling of the Governorship and Legislative Houses. Election Tribunal established for Zamfara State in Election petition No. EPT/ZMS/GS/GOV/03/07. The ruling was delivered on 2nd July, 2007. On the 14th April, 2007 elections were held into the office of State Governors throughout Nigeria. In Zamfara State the 1st Petitioner/Appellant was sponsored by the 2nd Petitioner/Appellant, while the 3rd Respondent/Respondent sponsored the 4th Respondent/Respondent. The election was conducted by the 1st and 2nd Respondents/Respondents. At the end of the election, the 1st and 2nd Respondents declared the 4th Respondent as the winner with 415,454 votes against 73,652 votes scored by the 2nd Appellant. The 3rd Respondent was struck out in the course of the proceedings before the lower Tribunal.

The Appellants were dissatisfied with the result of the said election. In an election Petition dated 11th May, 2007 and filed on 14th May, 2007, the Appellants, as Petitioners, sought to challenge the result of the election. It is Election Petition No. EPT/ZMS/GS/GOV/03/07. The main ground for this petition is that the election was invalid by reason of corrupt practices, and/or non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2006. Upon this main ground the Petitioners/Appellants sought for these 2 key reliefs. They are:-

(1) That the election be declared invalid as a result of corrupt practices and other irregularities; and

(2) An order directing that a fresh election is conducted.

This petition also incorporated what appears to me to be another ground which was presented as a relief. It was set out as follows:- viz;

“That the election was a nullity, same having been conducted without a verified and authenticated Voters’ Register.”

Upon being served with the Petition, the 1st and 2nd Respondents entered a conditional appearance on 21st May, 2007, while the 4th and 5th Respondents entered their own conditional appearance in a memorandum dated 22nd May, 2007. After the conditional appearance, the 4th and 5th Respondents filed 2 separate notices of preliminary objection challenging the competence of the petition and the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to entertain same.

While these notices of objection and other motions were still pending and waiting to be determined, the 4th and 5th Respondents filed another 2 separate motions in substantially the same terms and seeking the same reliefs. The 2 motions were later consolidated and argued after the earlier motions of the 4th and 5th Respondents were withdrawn and struck out. The ruling in this appeal was delivered in respect of these 2 consolidated motions. The motions were brought pursuant to Section 147(3) of the Electoral Act, 2006, Paragraph 49(2) and (5) of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act 2006, and paragraph 6 of the Election Tribunals and Court Practice Direction of 2007. They are for the following reliefs; i.e.

(1) An order setting down the preliminary points of law raised in paragraphs 1(a) to (g) of the 4th respondent’s reply in this petition for hearing;

(2) An order striking out the 1st Petitioner and 3rd Respondent on record in this petition;

(3) An order striking out paragraph 4 to 10 and 13 to 15 of the petition; and

(4) An order striking out the petition in its entirety for being fatally and incurably defective, incompetent, null and void; as well as for such further or other reliefs as the Tribunal may deem fit to make in all the circumstances of the case.”

Like I observed earlier on, the motion filed on behalf of the 5th Respondent was on similar terms. The grounds for these applications are also the same and were made out from the respective replies of the 4th and 5th Respondents to the petition. They were set out as follows:-