Marcel Ijeoma Ogwuegbu V. Mark Anayo Agomuo & Ors (1999)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

AKINTAN, J.C.A.

The applicant, Marcel Ijeoma Ogwuegbu, was a petitioner/cross-appellant in the appeal in this suit which was disposed of by this court on 16/3/99. The appeal was in respect of an election petition filed after the 10th respondent (INEC) had announced the result of the election held for the chairmanship of Ihitte/Uboma Local Government on 5/12/98. The appeal filed against the decision of the Local Government Election Tribunal was dismissed and the judgment of the tribunal was affirmed. The present applicant was a candidate at the election. He was also a party to the petition before the tribunal and the subsequent appeal in this court in the matter. He was in fact a cross-appellant in the appeal.

The applicant has, in his motion dated 12th April, 1999 and filed in the registry of this court on the same day, prayed the court for the following reliefs:

“to review its judgment delivered on the 16th day of March, 1999 for the purpose of correcting the clerical mistake or other error arising from an accidental slip or omission inherent therein.

Alternatively, the applicant will pray that the said judgment be varied so as to give effect to the its meaning and intention.

The applicant further prays for an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the 10th respondent, INEC, from announcing the result of the bye-election pending the determination of this application.”

The motion was supported by a 17-paragraph affidavit sworn to by the applicant and to which a copy of the judgment of this court delivered on 16/3/99 was attached. The applicant also deposed to a 9-paragraph further affidavit to which a copy of the judgment of the tribunal was attached and a 7-paragraph rejoinder to the counter- affidavit of the 1st respondent to which the statement of result sheets as declared by INEC were attached. The motion was opposed by the respondents. To that end, a 13-paragraph counter-affidavit was deposed to by Mark Anayo Agomuo, a legal practitioner acting on behalf of the 1st and 2nd respondents. Another 12-paragraph counter-affidavit deposed to by Aloy Njoku, a litigation officer at the 10th respondent’s Owerri office, was also filed on behalf of the 6th to 10th respondents.

The facts relied on by the applicant, as contained in the various affidavits deposed to by him, are that the applicant contested for the seat of Chairman of Ihitte/Uboma Local Government Area of Imo State at the election held on 5/12/98. The 1st and 2nd respondents contested the same election respectively for the post of Chairman and Vice Chairman of the same Local Government. At the end of the election, the 1st and 2nd respondents were declared by the 10th respondent as winner of the respective office for which they contested. The applicant was dissatisfied with the result as declared and he filed a petition against the result at the Local Government Election Tribunal. The tribunal heard the petition and delivered its judgment on 15/2/99 in which it upheld the applicant’s petition.

The tribunal held, inter alia, in its said judgment that:-

“In Exh. P19, the 1st respondent was credited with 10,209 votes while the petitioner was credited with 9,041 votes. The total scores of the 1st respondent in the 6 polling stations we ordered nullified, viz: J6, J9, J11, J8, G10 and J7 amount to 1479 votes while those scored by petitioner in those same polling stations total to 99 and we order those figures, i.e. 1479 and 99 votes to be deducted from the overall results of the 1st respondent and the petitioner respectively, thus 10,209 minus 1479 gives a balance of 8,730 while 9,041 minus 99 will give a balance of 8,942 votes for the 1st respondent and the petitioner respectively. Those are their lawful scores.”

The present applicant is the one referred to in the above portion of the judgment of the tribunal as the petitioner while the 1st respondent in this motion was also the 1st respondent referred to in the same judgment. Â

The tribunal thereafter made the following order in its said judgment:

“However, in view of the fact that at least 2 polling stations results are not known to anyone, we order the 10th respondent, INEC, to make arrangements to conduct a bye-election in polling stations D2, D7, J6, J9, J11, J8, G10, and J7 between the petitioner and 1st respondent as candidates in order to determine who emerges as the Chairman of Ihitte/Uboma LGA of Imo State. Any votes scored by the candidates in the bye-election are to be added by INEC to the scores already given above – i.e. 8,730 for the 1st respondent and 8,942 for the petitioner.”

The 1st respondent was dissatisfied with the verdict of the tribunal. He therefore appealed to this court against the judgment. The applicant also filed a cross-appeal against the judgment as he too was dissatisfied with some aspects of the said judgment. The appeal and cross-appeal were heard in this court and judgment in the appeal was delivered by this court on 16/3/99. This court (per Aderemi, J.C.A. to which Pats-Acholonu and Akpiroroh, JJ.C.A. concurred) dismissed both the appeal and the cross-appeal and affirmed the judgment and orders made by the tribunal. Aderemi, J.C.A. held, inter alia, in the leading judgment: