Pastor (Barr.) Anayo Enechukwu J V. Dr. Chimaroke O. Nnamani & Ors. (2008)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA, J.C.A.

This is an appeal by one of the seven (7) candidates who contested the election of 21st day of April 2007 into the Senate for the Enugu East Senatorial District.

The Petitioner, hereinafter referred to as the Appellant, who was the candidate of Accord (A) party in the said election had petitioned the National Assembly Governorship & Legislative Houses Election Petition Tribunal Holden at Enugu. The appellant in his petition had challenged and questioned the election on the following grounds:- that the 1st Respondent was not qualified to contest the said election; that the 1st Respondent was not duly elected by the majority of lawful and or valid votes cast at the election and that the election was fraught with irregularities. The Appellant had prayed the tribunal to declare that the 1sl Respondent was not duly declared elected or returned as announced but to declare him, the Petitioner, as validly and duly elected as the person who scored the majority of lawful votes cast. In the alternative he had prayed that the said election be nullified by the tribunal.

Both Respondents duly filed their respective reply to the petition, The allegations of the appellant contained in the petition were refuted and said to be unfounded. The 2nd – 171st respondents in their reply al pages 250 – 267 of the Record of Appeal stated that the said election was properly conducted in substantial conformity with the Electoral Act, 2006 and that the 1st Respondent was duly returned as the winner. Having duly exchanged processes, all parties filed their respective written addresses and same were adopted. At the end of hearing the appellant’s petition was dismissed by the Tribunal on 13th November, 2007.

Dissatisfied with the decision of the tribunal, the Appellant filed a Notice of Appeal on 29th November, 2007. The said Notice of Appeal contains the following eight (8) grounds of appeal without their particulars.

GROUNDS OF APPEAL

Ground 1 – Error in Law

The decision of the tribunal upholding the return of the election was reached in clear breach of the principles of fair hearing and therefore, indefensible in law.

Ground 2 – Error in Law

The Tribunal failed to appreciate the proper issues placed before them for determination, the misconception of which has led to the miscarriage of justice in the judgment.

Ground 3 – Error in Law

The Tribunal erred in law in their failure to determine the issue of jurisdiction raised by the Petitioner/Appellant before considering the evidence preferred (sic) by and/or elicited from the 1st 2nd & 3rd Respondents’ witnesses, the said pieces of evidence being based on incompetent Replies,

Ground 4 – Error in Law

The learned trial Justices of the Tribunal erred in law in their failure to enter judgment against the 4th – 171st Respondents who failed to oppose the petition.