Mode of Transmission of Election Results under the Electoral Act 2022

CASE TITLE: NURUDEEN v. OYETOLA & ORS (2023) LPELR-60093(CA)

JUDGMENT DATE: 24TH MARCH, 2023

PRACTICE AREA: ELECTION PETITION

LEAD JUDGMENT: MUHAMMED LAWAL SHUAIBU, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on an election petition.

FACTS:

The appellant and the 1st respondent contested in the gubernatorial election of Osun State, conducted by the 3rd respondent on 16th July, 2022 under the platforms of the 2nd and 4th respondents respectively. The Appellant was declared the winner of the said election and was returned elected, being the person who has the majority of lawful votes cast at the election. Dissatisfied with the election and return of the appellant, the 1st and 2nd respondents filed a petition at the trial tribunal, alleging that the appellant was, at the time of the election, not qualified to contest the election, he was not duly elected by the majority of the lawful votes cast at the election and that the election was invalid by reason of non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022.

​In response, the appellant filed his reply to the petition and thereafter, the matter proceeded to trial. At the conclusion of the trial and upon overruling the pre-emptory challenges to the competence of the petition by the appellant, the reliefs sought by the 1st and 2nd respondents were granted.

​Displeased with the decision, the appellant approached the Court of Appeal.

ISSUES:

The following issues were identified by the 1st and 2nd respondents and adopted by the Court for determination:

1. Whether the majority decision of the Tribunal was validity rendered?

2. Whether the Tribunal rightly dismissed the objections to its jurisdiction to entertain and determine the petition?

3. Whether the Tribunal rightly admitted and gave effect to certified true copies of documents tendered by the petitioners?

4. Whether the Tribunal rightly rejected Exhibit 2R, RW4 and rightly held that forgery was proved with regards to Form EC9 and file D?

5. Whether having regard to the subsisting regulations/law and the totality of oral and documentary evidence placed before the Tribunal, the tribunal rightly reached its conclusions that over-voting was proved thus entitling the petitioners to the reliefs sought in the petition?

6. Whether the appellant proved that Exhibits R-BVR, R.BVR 1-129, 2R.RW2, RBVM, RBVM, RBVM 1 series, and other documentary evidence made by the respondent to the petition and issued during the subsistence of Exhibit BVR complied with oral evidence before the tribunal disproved the petitioners’ case before the Tribunal.

7. Whether the Tribunal rightly gave effect to the contents of the tables presented by the petitioners whose contents were derived from evidence already placed before the Tribunal in terms of unchallenged documentary and oral evidence and rightly granted the reliefs of the petitioners?

8. Whether the appellants proved the allegation of bias against the Tribunal?

DECISION/HELD:

On the whole, the appeal was adjudged meritorious and allowed. The judgment of the Tribunal was set aside.

RATIOS:

• ELECTION PETITION – DECISION OF ELECTION PETITION TRIBUNAL: Extent/scope of the application of Section 294 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) to writing and delivery of the judgment of the Election Petition Tribunal
• ELECTION PETITION – GROUNDS FOR CHALLENGING AN ELECTION: Grounds for challenging an election; whether facts offered to prove one may be utilized in proving another
• ELECTION PETITION – ELECTION PETITION PROCEEDINGS: Whether a Tribunal shall defer until final judgment its ruling on a preliminary objection or interlocutory application that attacks the jurisdiction of the Tribunal or competence of the petition
• ELECTION PETITION – ELECTION RESULT: Mode of transmission of election results under the Electoral Act 2022 and use of BVAS as an integral part of the same/election processes
• ELECTION PETITION – BURDEN OF PROOF: Position of the law on burden of proof where an election petition is declaratory in nature; whether same position applies where a party alleges non-compliance with the Electoral Act
• ELECTION PETITION – ELECTION PETITION PROCEEDINGS: Whether Section 137 of the Electoral Act can be said to have dispensed with the need to call polling unit agents who operated BVAS machines in disputed polling units
• ELECTION PETITION – OVER-VOTING: Whether the voters register is required in the proof of over-voting
• COURT – BIAS OF COURT: What an accuser must establish in order to succeed in proving an allegation of judicial bias

Click here to log in to your Dashboard to see more judgments. To subscribe, go to store.lawpavilion.com