Usman Ali Maitsidau & Anor V. Engr. Hamisu Ibrahim Chidari & Ors (2008)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

BABA ALKALI BA’ABA, J. C. A.

This is an appeal against the Ruling of the Kano State Governorship and Legislative Houses Tribunal delivered on the 7th day of August, 2007, contained at pages 160 – 163 of the record of proceedings.

The 2nd appellant sponsored the 1st appellant to contest election into the Kano State House of Assembly for Makoda Constituency, Kano State while the 1st respondent contested the said election under the platform of the 2nd respondent, the Peoples Democratic Party, (PDP).

The election was conducted on the 14th of April, 2007, after which the result was declared by the 3rd respondent, on the 16th day of April, 2007. The 1st respondent was declared the winner of the said election.

Dissatisfied with the declaration and return of the 1st respondent as the winner of the said election, the appellants, on the 12th of May, 2007 filed an election petition at the Tribunal challenging the declaration and return of the 1st respondent as the winner of the said election on the ground that the election is invalid by reason of corrupt practices and non-compliance with the Electoral Act because of the burning down of

the 6th Respondent’s office in Koguna, Makoda Local Government where voting materials for polling units in Durma Ward was kept, thereby causing a serious breach of the peace warranting the cancellation and postponement of the election of the said ward.

Those 6th respondents’ staffs were also unable to conduct election in Maitsidau ward because of violence. The petition was served on respondents and the 1st respondent filed a reply dated and filed on 6/7/07. The petitioners/appellants filed a Petitioners reply to the 1st respondent’s reply dated 10/7/07 on 11/7/07 contained at pages 91 – 98 of the record of proceedings. The 3rd – 23rd respondents filed a motion for extension of time to file a reply to the petition dated 18/7/07. The 1st respondent filed a motion dated and filed on 18/7/07, praying for the following orders:

“1. An order dismissing the Election Petition for want of jurisdiction by the Hon. Tribunal.

2. For such further order(s) as the Hon. Tribunal may deem fit to make in the circumstances.”

While the motions filed by the 3rd – 23rd respondents and the 1st respondent respectively were pending, the petitioner/ appellant filed an application for the issuance of a pre-hearing notice. A motion dated 26/7/07 was filed in respect of the pre-hearing notice and the motion came up on 7/8/07 for hearing and the Tribunal suo motu raised the issue that the application was filed out of time consequently the Tribunal dismissed the petition in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 3(4) of the Election Tribunal and Court Practice Directions as an abandoned petition. The election Tribunal in its ruling at pages 160 – 163, inter alia held:

“Having struck out the said motion on notice, there is nothing left before the Tribunal in relation to pre-hearing application. By Section 74(1) (m) of the Evidence Act Cap. 112, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990, this Tribunal is allowed to make reference to the processes before it. We have meticulously and painstakingly cross check the correspondence file of this petition and discovered that the Petitioner’s reply was filed on 11/7/07 and served on the respondents on 12/7/07 and 16/7/07 respectively. By paragraph 3(1) of the Practice Directions, the Petitioners are supposed to apply for Pre-Hearing within

7 days after service of their reply. The seven days after the service of Petitioners’ reply i.e. using the 16th July, 2007 as the last date, will expire on 23rd July, 2007. As at today 7th August, 2007, there is no application to that effect. There being no application there is nothing to adjourn.

Consequently we invoke the powers conferred upon this Tribunal by paragraph 3(4) of the election Tribunal and Court Practice Directions 2007 to dismiss the petition as an abandoned petition. The petition is accordingly dismissed as an abandoned petition.”

Dissatisfied with the Ruling of the Tribunal dated the 7th day of August, 2007 contained at pages 160 – 163 of the record of proceedings, the appellants by their notice of appeal dated and filed on the 21/8/2007 containing three grounds of appeal, at pages 164 – 167 of the record of proceedings, appealed against the Ruling to this Court.

In accordance with the Court of Appeal Rules Practice Direction 2007, the appellants filed their joint brief of argument dated the 6th day of September, 2007, filed on the 7th day of September, 2007 while the respondents’ brief dated and filed on the 21st day of September, 2007, was deemed properly filed and served by order of this Court granted on the 15th day of October, 2007.