INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION (INEC) & ANOR v. UMANA OKON UMANA & ORS
In The Supreme Court of Nigeria
On Monday, the 15th day of February, 2016
SC.2/2016 (REASONS)
RATIO
ON WHOM RESTS THE BURDEN OF PROVING IRREGULARITIES, CORRUPT PRACTICES AND ACTS OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ELECTORAL ACT, 2010 AS AMENDED
The law is indeed well settled that a Petitioner is required by law to establish his case alleging irregularities, corrupt practices and acts of non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2010 as amended, polling unit by polling unit as stated by this Court in UCHA VS. ELECHI (2012) 13 NWLR (Pt.1317) 330 AT 359. PER MAHMUD MOHAMMED, J.S.C.
JUSTICES
MAHMUD MOHAMMED Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
IBRAHIM TANKO MUHAMMAD Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
SULEIMAN GALADIMA Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
OLABODE RHODES-VIVOUR Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
KUMAI BAYANG AKA’AHS Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
KUDIRAT MOTONMORI OLATOKUNBO KEKERE-EKUN Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
CHIMA CENTUS NWEZE Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
Between
- INDEPENDENT NATIONAI ELECTORAL COMMISSION (INEC)
2. RESIDENT ELECTORAL COMMISSIONER, AKWA IBOM STATE Appellant(s)
AND
- UMANA OKON UMANA
2. ALL PROGRESSIVES CONGRESS
3. UDOM GABRIEL EMMANUEL
4. PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC PARTY
5. NIGERIA POLICE FORCE Respondent(s)
CHIMA CENTUS NWEZE, J.S.C. (Delivering the Leading Judgment): The facts ofthis appeal and those of SC.1/2016, just disposed of now, and indeed, of the other appeals [SC.3/2016; SC.4/2016; SC.6/2016 and SC.7/2016, arose from the events of the said election of April 11, 2015. As such, it would not serve any useful purpose restating the same set of facts again in this appeal. I, therefore, adopt the factual narrative, already, set out in SC.1/ 2016.
The appellant formulated five issues for the determination of this appeal: issues which have been elaborately dealt with in SC.1/2016. Iaccordinglyadopt my views and conclusion in the said judgment as my reasons and conclusion in this appeal. In particular, having regard to my findings on exhibits 12 and 337 in SC.1/2016, I restate here that the Lower Court erred in its view that these exhibits established the allegations of non compliance with the Electoral Act andin addition, proved corrupt practices in the said election. They did not.
In all, I adopt my reasons in SC.1/2016 and SC.3/2016 in this appeal with regard to the requisite standard of proof; the error of the Lower Court in holding
that there was no collation of results at the LGAs and the State Collation Centre. I have no reason to depart from my views on the Card Reader Report, exhibit 317 and the Lower Court’s error in nullifying the said elections in the eighteen LGAs. I adopt the said reasons as my reasons for the judgment in this appeal. Appeal allowed.
Parties are to bear their costs.
MAHMUD MOHAMMED, J.S.C.: This appeal is also against the judgment of the Court of Appeal Abuja Division delivered on 18th December, 2015, affirming the judgment of the Akwa Ibom State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal of 21st October, 2015.
There are 5 issues in the Appellants brief of argument all of which are predicated on whether or not the 1st and 2nd Respondents as petitioner had proved their case at the Governorship Election Tribunal to justify the nullification of the Governorship election of 15th April, 2015 in 18 of the 31 Local Government Areas of Akwa Ibom State. The evidence contained in the Police Report Exhibit 337 relied upon heavily by the 1st and 2nd Respondents in proving their case on the allegation of corrupt practices and non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral
Act, 2010 as amended, was not proved beyond reasonable doubt as required by law. This is because the same Police Report Exhibit 337 also contains observations that the election of 11th April, 2015 was conducted peacefully throughout Akwa Ibom State.
With regard to the evidence of PW49, PW50, PW51 and PW52 heavily relied upon by the 1st and 2nd Respondents in their brief of argument, that evidence was rejected by the trial Governorship Tribunal with all the documentary Exhibits put in evidence by PW49 in particular for failure to call makers of the documents to testify before the Tribunal. The Court below therefore was wrong in accepting evidence merely dumped on the Tribunal to prove the findings in support of the nullification of the election in 18 of the 31 Local Government Area of Akwa Ibom State.
The law is indeed well settled that a Petitioner is required by law to establish his case alleging irregularities, corrupt practices and acts of non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2010 as amended, polling unit by polling unit as stated by this Court in UCHA VS. ELECHI (2012) 13 NWLR (Pt.1317) 330 AT 359. On the whole, I hold a view that the 1st
and 2nd Respondents who were Petitioners at the Governorship Election Tribunal had failed to prove their case as required by law to have been entitled to judgment nullifying the election in 18 out of 31 Local Government Area in Akwa Ibom State and to that extent the Court below was in error in affirming that judgment on appeal.
It is for the above reasons and fuller reasons given by my learned brother Nweze, JSC. in his Reasons for Judgment just delivered that I also allowed the appeal in my own judgment delivered on Wednesday 3rd February, 2016 and undertook to give my own reasons for doing so today Monday 15th February, 2016.
IBRAHIM TANKO MUHAMMAD, J.S.C.: On Wednesday, 3rd of February, 2016, I agreed with my learned brother, Nweze, JSC, who delivered the lead judgment, allowing the appeal and reason for doing so adjourned to today.
My learned brother, Nweze JSC, afforded me the opportunity to read before today, the reasons be marshaled for allowing the appeal. I am in agreement with him in his reasoning which I adopt as mine. I have nothing more. I have nothing more to add. I allow the appeal and abide by consequential orders made in the lead reasoning
including order on costs.
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, J.S.C.: On Wednesday the 3rd day of February, 2016, I agreed entirely with my learned brother NWEZE JSC., who in his lead judgment allowed this appeal. The reasons proffered by me for allowing the appeal was adjourned to today, the 15th day of February, 2016.
I have had the privilege of reading in advance the reasons admirably given for allowing this appeal. I am in agreement with his reasoning and conclusions. I adopt them as mine. I too allow this appeal. I shall abide by consequential orders made in the lead judgment including order made as to Costs.
OLABODE RHODES-VIVOUR, J.S.C.: I adopt my reasons in SC.1/2016 and the comprehensive reasoning of my learned brother, Nweze, JSC in the same appeal which I read in draft. I also allow this appeal.
KUMAI BAYANG AKA’AHS, J.S.C.: This appeal is based on the same facts as SC.1/2016. I allowed the appeal on 3rd February 2016 and adjourned the reasons for judgment to today, 15th February, 2016.
The evidence of DW4, DW25, DW26, and DW27 put paid to the claim by the 1st and 2nd respondents and the reliance by the lower Court that Exhibit 317 showed the total number of
accredited voters in Akwa Ibom State was 437,128 while the alleged number of votes cast stood at 1,222,836 and this was proof of over voting. DW4’s evidence was that they were still uploading data to the server until it was shut down and so Exhibit 317 did not contain the total number of accredited voters. INEC witnesses DW24, DW25, DW26 and DW27 also stated in evidence that the process of manual accreditation proceeded as was expressly provided for in the Electoral Act in the face of the Card Reader Machine challenges during the election and details of the manual accreditation cannot befound in aCard Reader data. For this reason and the more detailed reasons inthe judgment of my learned brother Nweze JSC in SC.1/20016 and SC.2/2016.
I also allowed the appeal with no order as to costs.
KUDIRAT MOTONMORI OLATOKUNBO KEKERE-EKUN, J.S.C.: Whenwe heard this appeal on Wednesday 3rd February 2016, I agreed with the lead judgment of my learned brother Nweze, JSC that the appeal has merit and I accordingly allowed it. I promised to give my reasons for so doing today, 15thFebruary 2016.
This appeal arose out of the Governorship election held in Akwa Ibom State on
11th April, 2015wherein the 3rd respondent was returned as the duly elected Governor of the State. It is against the decision of the Court of Appeal delivered on 18th December, 2015 affirming the judgment of the Akwa Ibom State Governorship Election Tribunal delivered on 21st October, 2015which nullified the election in eighteen Local Government Areas (LGAS) of the State and ordered a re-run in the affected LGAS. The decision of the trial Tribunal gave rise to several appeals, namely, SC.1/2016, SC.3/2016, SC.4/2016, SC.6/2016, SC.7/2016 and the instant appeal, SC.2/2016 between the same parties and on substantially similar grounds.
I have had the benefit of reading before now the reasons just proffered by my learned brother, Nweze, JSC for allowing the appeal. I agree entirely and adopt the reasons and conclusions as mine, I abide by all the consequential orders made, inclusive of costs.
Appearances
Dr Onyechi Ikpeazu, OON; SAN; Elder Paul Ananaba, SAN with Raymond Anyawata; E. A. Ibrahim Effiong; Ijeoma Ukchay (Mrs); Alex Ejesieme; Onyinye Anumonye; Emeka Nri-Ezedi; Emeka Eze; Ogechi Ogbonna; Nwachukwu Ibegbu; Obinna Onya; Chuka Ikpeazu, Julius Mba and Emmanuel Rukarit For Appellant
AND
Chief Wole Olanipekun, OFR; SAN; Solomon Umoh, San; Dayo Akinlaja, SAN, with Chief Victor Iyanam; Femi Morohundia; Bola Aidi; Austin Otah; Sji Olowolafe, Edet Ating; Benjamin Alabi, Effiong Abia; Ubong Offiong; Olabode Olanipekun; Effiong Oquong; Olubukola
Araromi (Mrs); Aisha Aliyu (Mrs); Bolarinwa Awujoola; C. M, Dioji; F. S. Abioduni Temitope Olanipekun (Miss); Adebayo Majekolagbe; Tolu Adetomiwa; S. O. Enejah; Ademola Oyelayo; Madu Gadzama and Chukwudifu Mbamali for 1st and 2nd Respondents.
O. D. Dodo, SAN; Chris Uche, SAN; Paul Usoro, SAN; Chief O.E.B. Offiong, SAN; Gordy Uche, SAN, with: Dr. G. O. A. Ogunyomi; Nelson Uzuegbu; Reginald Nwobbi; Nasir A. Dangiri; Isaac Anumudu; Audu Anuga; Dan Abia; James Odiba; Ofombuk Akpabio (Mrs.); Terhemba Gbashima; Utibe Nwoko; Adetola Ibironke (Miss); Obafolahan Ojibara; Mfon Udeme; A. F. Jumbo; Stella Ebrimoni (Miss); Patrick Okoh; Ime Edem-Nse; Samson A. Eigege; Luter I. Atagheri Ginika Ezeoke; Ikechukwu Duru; Yunusa Umaru; Prince Nwafuru; Olatunji Muritala; Emem Umoh (Miss); Ifeanyi Ndumnego; Kanayo Okafor; Emmanuel Okorie; Uzoma Nwosu Ilheme; Isaac Nwachukwu; E. J. Imuekemeh (Miss); Olakunle Lawal; Blessing Akinsehinwa; Francis Genesis; Modetus Alozie, Ufedo Tom-Yakubu (Miss); James Ebbi; Francis Nsiegbunam; Ijeoma Nwosu (Miss); Jummai Pam; Chinwendu Nduka-Edede (Miss), and Na-Eema Goje (Miss) for 3rd respondent.
Tayo Oyetibo, SAN Adekunle Oyesanya, SAN, with Dominic Okon, Edet Bassey, Emmanuel Akpan, Nsikak Udoh, Paul Mgbeoma, M. Mene-Josiah, Faruk Khamagam, Onyinye G. Nwagbarra and Jennifer Adole for 4th respondent For Respondent
