Background
This case revolves around the governorship election held on April 11, 2015, in Gombe State, where the 1st appellant, Alhaji Muhammed Inuwa Yahaya, contested against the 1st respondent, Alhaji Ibrahim Hassan Dankwanbo, who was declared the winner. The appellants filed a petition before the Gombe State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, alleging corrupt practices, fraud, rigging, and over-voting, thereby challenging the declaration made by the electoral body, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
Issues
The central issues for determination in this appeal included:
- Whether the court below correctly assessed the admissibility and weight of key evidences, particularly exhibit ‘AN’, the card reader report, and the testimony of PW21.
- Whether the testimonies of several witnesses were rightly dismissed under the provisions of the Illiterate Protection Act, and if that dismissal affects the appellants’ case.
- Whether the appellants effectively met their burden of proof regarding allegations of over-voting and corrupt practices.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court established that in election petitions, the burden of proof lies with the petitioner. Sections 138(1)(b) and 139(1) of the Electoral Act, 2010, were emphasized, noting that any non-compliance must not only be proven but must also substantially affect the result of the election.
Court Findings
The Court significantly found that:
- Both lower courts had adequately addressed the evidences and maintained that the discrepancies between exhibit ‘AN’ and exhibit ‘AL’ did not prove over-voting, as accredited voters exceeded the votes cast.
- The testimonies of PW2, PW3, PW7, PW8, PW10, PW11, PW12, PW14, and PW17 were ruled inadmissible, further reinforcing the inapplicability of the Illiterate Protection Act on the presented English translations.
- Over-voting was not established because the appellants failed to produce the relevant voters' register required to support their claims.
Conclusion
Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the decisions of the lower courts, which found no merit in the appellants' claims.
Significance
This case underscores the stringent requirements for petitions challenging election results in Nigeria. It clarifies that petitions must effectively discharge the burden of evidence and withstand scrutiny under the provisions of the Electoral Act. It also reiterates the principle that concurrent findings by lower courts will generally not be disturbed unless shown to be perverse.