Background
This appeal concerns an election petition disputing the election results for the Borno North Senatorial District. The appellant, Alhaji Mohammed Sanusi Daggash, contested the election under the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), while the respondent, Hajja Fati Ibrahim Bulama, represented the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP). After a close election held on April 12, 2003, Daggash was declared the winner. However, Bulama filed an election petition alleging electoral malpractices and irregularities.
Issues
The following key issues arose from the appeals:
- Whether the majority of Tribunal members correctly dismissed the certified true copy of the Borno State white paper on a previous inquiry.
- Whether the election tribunal has the power to review decisions of administrative panels of inquiry.
- Whether the non-production of the original report of the inquiry was fatal to the objection.
- Whether the disqualification of the 1st respondent under section 66(1)(h) of the 1999 Constitution was established.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal primarily focused on the admissibility of documentary evidence, particularly regarding the certified documents related to the panel of enquiry's findings. The court ruled in favor of the appellant, establishing his right to rely on the original panel report, despite the Tribunal's previous ruling on the inadmissibility of the documents.
Court Findings
In their judgment, the judges concluded that the Tribunal erred in rejecting exhibit “A”, the certified true copy of the white paper, as well as the original report from the panel of inquiry. The panel of inquiry's findings included serious allegations of fraud and embezzlement against Bulama, providing substantial evidence for her disqualification. The majority ruling of the Tribunal was considered erroneous and lacking sufficient legal basis.
Conclusion
The appeals were ultimately allowed, with the court asserting the appellant's right to be declared elected due to the substantiated claims against the 1st respondent. The Tribunal's judgment was set aside, and the election results were nullified based on Bulama's ineligibility.
Significance
This case underscores the importance of documentary evidence in electoral disputes and affirms the necessity for election tribunals to critically engage with all relevant materials without dismissing key evidence that can substantively affect a party's eligibility and standing in an election.