“…Akinfosile v. Ijose (1960) 5 F.S.C. 192, where the Court held that a petitioner who alleges in his petition a particular non-compliance and avers in his prayer that the non-compliance was substantial must so satisfy the Court. If there should be any inconsistency between the two decisions, it is the decision of this Court that binds us, and it would appear to me that we are bound by the authority of Akinfosile v. Ijose to hold that the petitioner must show both that irregularities took place and that they might have affected the result of the election.”
LawCompass
… the Digital Solution Research Tool
