The 1st appellant and the 1st respondent were candidates of the 2nd appellant and the 2nd respondent respectively in the governorship election conducted in Imo State on 8th March, 2019 along with 68 other candidates. The 1st respondent was returned as the winner of the election. Dissatisfied with the result, the 1st appellant filed a petition at the Governorship Election Tribunal, wherein they contended amongst others that although election held in 27 Local Government Areas of Imo State, 305 electoral wards and 3,523 Polling Units, the 3rd respondent (INEC) cancelled the election in 252 polling units, collated results from 2,883 polling units and excluded results from 388 polling units. That in the 388 polling units, the appellants scored an overwhelming majority of votes, the results of which was excluded from the ward collation result (Forms EC8B). Furthermore, that the calculated or ascertained unlawfully excluded votes from the 388 polling units summing up to 213,695 votes were due to the appellants while the 1st respondent was entitled to only 1,903 votes from the 388 polling units. Thus, that the 1st respondent was returned based on wrong computation of the votes collated from the 2,883 polling units. The Appellants therefore sought inter alia that: 1. The 1st respondent was not validly elected by majority of lawful votes cast. 2. The declaration and return of the 1st Respondent is invalid by reason of non-compliance with the Electoral Act. The trial Tribunal found no merit in the petition and dismissed it. Dissatisfied, appellants appealed to the Court of Appeal. In a majority decision of 4:1, the Court dismissed the appeal. Further dissatisfied, appellants appealed to the Supreme Court. The respondents filed a cross-appeal.

KUDIRAT MOTONMORI OLATOKUNBO KEKERE-EKUN, J.S.C. (Delivering the Leading Judgment):

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and adjudged the cross-appeal academic.

D. D. Dodo (SAN), Abdul Ibahim (SAN), Chief A. O. Ajana (SAN) with them, Chief Olusola Oke, and Chief C.O.C. Akaolisa, Esq. For Appellant(s) Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), J.T.U, Nnlodum (SAN), Emeka Okpoko (SAN), Bode Olanipekun (SAN), with them, A. S. Ogujiofor, Esq. for the 1st Respondent K.C.O. Njemanze (SAN), Chief C. U. Ekomaru (SAN), Emeka Etiaba (SAN), L. M. Alozie (SAN), with them, L. A. Njemanze, Esq. for the 2nd Respondent Aham Eke Ejelam (SAN), J. O. Asoluka, (SAN), with them, C. O. Ahumibe, Esq., C. U. Onyeukwu, Esq., and C. C. Chikere, Esq. for the 3rd Respondent

ELECTION PETITION - ELECTION RESULT - How to prove allegation of unlawful exclusion of votes in an election; instance where a party would be held to have successfully proved unlawful exclusion of votes

ELECTION PETITION – ELECTION RESULT – How to prove allegation of unlawful exclusion of votes in an election; instance where a party would be held to have successfully proved unlawful exclusion of votes

PRINCIPLE

SUBSCRIPTION REQUIRED! Log In or Register Now

Dear Esteemed Visitor

Thank you for your interest in LawCompass™. Unfortunately, you are currently logged out. To access our exclusive repository of premium legal insights, please Log In to your account.

If you’re not yet a premium member, consider Registering Now for unlimited access to our extensive collection of Cases, Laws, Rules/Forms, and more.

Best regards, LawCompass™.

You are here:

Home
PRINCIPLE
ELECTION PETITION – ELECTION RESULT – How to prove allegation of unlawful exclusion of votes in an election; instance where a party would be held to have successfully proved unlawful exclusion of votes

My LawKitShare

No bookmark found

ELECTION PETITION – ELECTION RESULT – How to prove allegation of unlawful exclusion of votes in an election; instance where a party would be held to have successfully proved unlawful exclusion of votes

See Also:

Table of Contents

My LawKitShare