Modu Lamba Wulgo V. Abatch Umar Bukar & Ors (1999)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

OGEBE, J.C.A.

This appeal arose from elections into Local Government Councils conducted throughout the country on the 5th of December 1998 by the Independent National Electoral Commission.

In Ngala Local Government of Borno State, the appellant was a candidate for the chairmanship of the Local Government on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) while the 1st respondent contested for the same office on the platform of the All Peoples Party (APP).

The 1st respondent was declared duly elected as the Chairman of Ngala Local Government having scored 11,952 votes as against 8,404 votes scored by the appellant.

Being dissatisfied with the result the appellant petitioned to the Local Government Election Tribunal, Borno State against the respondents. He challenged the election of the 1st respondent on the ground “that the election was voided by corrupt practices, irregularities and/or offences against the Local Government (Basic Constitutional and Transitional Provisions) Decree No. 36 of 1998 which substantially affected the result of the election”.

In the particulars given under the ground the appellant complained specifically of the conduct of the election at five wards i.e. Fuye, Darak, Ndufu, Worshele and Gamboru A Wards.

At the trial, the appellant called 12 witnesses while the 1st respondent called 3 witnesses. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th respondents called no witnesses.

At the end of counsel’s written addresses the Election Tribunal dismissed the appellant’s petition.

The appellant has brought this appeal against the decision of the Election Tribunal on 4 grounds contained in the notice of appeal.

The learned counsel for the appellant formulated only one issue for determination as follows:

“1. Whether having regard to the circumstances of this case and the evidence, the tribunal was right to have dismissed the appellant’s petition.

The 1st respondent also filed a brief of argument and formulated one issue for determination. It reads:

“Whether the tribunal was wrong when it dismissed the appellant’s petition on the ground that he has not proved that the non-compliance or irregularities alleged during the election, substantially affected the result of the election.”

The learned counsel to the 2nd -4th respondents also filed a brief of argument on their behalf and adopted the issue formulated by the appellant.