Sam Adejoh Okedi V. Independent National Electoral Commission & Ors (2012)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

EJEMBI EKO, J.C.A (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

On 9th April 2011, the 1st-4th Respondents conducted general elections in Idah Federal Constituency. The 1st Appellant was the candidate of the 2nd Appellant for that election. The 5th Respondent sponsored the 6th Respondent as its candidate for the said election. The 6th Respondent was returned by the 1st – 4th Respondents as the winner of the said election for a seat in the House of Representatives.

Dissatisfied with the return of the 5th Respondent the Appellants, on 29th April, 2011,filed a petition challenging the said return of the 6th Respondent. The Respondents filed their respective replies to the petition, and issues were duly joined.

The complaint of the appellants, the petitioners, was that the 5th and 6th Respondents did not score the majority of the lawful votes cast at the election. The focus of the Petitioners’ complaint was the invalidity of the votes cast in two wards of two Local Government Areas, namely: Ibaji Local Government Area and Igalamela/Odolu Local Government. The Federal Constituency comprised of four (4) Local Government Areas. The summary of the complaint of the Petitioners is that;

1. Voting did not take place in some of the units as a result of violence and yet results were allegedly produced and computed.

ii. Corrupt practices in the process of collation of the results by 1st – 4th Respondents in alleged connivance with officers of the 5th Respondent.

iii. Multiple thumb printing of ballot papers.

iv. Compilation of results outside INEC’S authorized or designated venues.

v. Mutilation of result sheets (Forms EC8A (1) without counter-signing and false entries on result sheets.

vi. Inflation of votes.

vii. None or improper accreditation of voters

The Petitioners/Appellants called four (4) witnesses. They also tendered documents in evidence. Respondents also tendered documents.

They also called witnesses. The 1st – 4th Respondents called one witness. The 5th Respondent called one witness. The 5th Respondent, on his part, called two witnesses, including himself.

At the close of the trial the parties exchanged written addresses, which they later adopted. In its reserved judgment, delivered on 25th October, 2011, the National and State Houses of Assembly Election Tribunal (hereinafter called “the Tribunal”) dismissed the petition in its entirety. The appeal is against that decision of the Tribunal.

vii. In this appeal the parties have exchanged their Briefs of Argument.