Peoples Democratic Party V. Independent National Electoral Commission & Ors (2012)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

S. MUNTAKA-COOMASSIE, J.S.C.

The appellant challenged the return of the 2nd and 3rd respondents as the duly elected Governor and Deputy Governor respectively of Zamfara State in the gubernatorial election conducted on 26/4/2011. The respondents filed their respective replies to the petition in which they encompassed their objections to the Petition.

The trial Tribunal ordered that the objection would be heard together with the substantive petition. The petition was heard on its own merit after which the parties filed their respective written addresses. The respondents argued the objections in their written addresses while the appellant also replied. The trial Tribunal in its judgment up held the objection and Struck out paragraphs 12, 17, 18, 19, 22, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 41, 42, 43 and 44 of the petition.

In all, the trial Tribunal held that the petitioner has failed to prove the allegations in its petition and same was dismissed.

Dissatisfied with this decision the petitioner unsuccessfully appealed to the Court of Appeal Sokoto Division, hereinafter called the lower court. The lower court affirmed the decisions of the trial Tribunal and dismissed the appeal.

The lower court also considered the affected paragraphs of the petition and held as follows:

“The paragraphs above in my view are too general, too generic and lacking in any particularity as they are not tied to any particular polling unit or particular number of people who were said to have disenfranchised. The fact that a party can file further particulars orderly in a reply the averments in the vague paragraphs cannot cure the defect.

The pleadings must not be general it must be Specific as to facts. It is settled law that a petitioner is under obligation to plead particulars of fraud, or falsification without which the allegation is a nonstarter”.

Finally the lower court also held that the appellant has not proved the allegations in its Petition. It is as a result of this decision that, the appellant has appealed to this Court.The appellant in its brief of argument distilled five issues for determination as follows:

“(1) considering the clear provisions of section 140(4) of the Electoral Act, paragraphs 17(1) and (2), 47(1) and 53 of the First schedule (to the Electoral Act) vis-a-vis the provision of paragraph 12(5) of the same First schedule to the Electoral Act, whether the lower court was not in grave error in holding as it did that the striking out by the trial Election Tribunal of paragraph 12, 17,18, 19, 22, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 41, 42, 43, and 44 of the petition was/is justified-Grounds 2, 3, 4, 8, 9 and 10.

(2) Whether the lower court was not in grave error in its conclusion in relation to the joinder of issues on the struck out paragraphs by the 2nd-4th Respondents, as well as its rationalizing the basis for their being struck out. – Ground 11.

(3) Has the Supreme Court decision in Nwankwo v. Yar’adua (2010) 12 NWLR (pt. 1209) 518 been abrogated or replaced by paragraph 12(5) of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act – Ground 1.

(4) Whether or not compliance with the provisions of the Election Tribunal and Court practice Directions 2011 are not mandatory for the Parties – Ground 5.

(5) Considering the circumstances of this case, the state of pleadings and evidence adduced, including the abandonment of its pleadings by the First Respondent, whether the lower court was not in error in holding that the Appellant did not prove its case. – Grounds 6, 7, 12 & 13”.