ATIKU ABUBAKAR V. INEC (2020)

Background

This case arose from the 2019 Presidential Election in Nigeria, where Atiku Abubakar, the candidate for the People's Democratic Party (PDP), contested against Muhammadu Buhari of the All Progressives Congress (APC). The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared Buhari the winner, a decision Abubakar challenged, claiming it was not based on a majority of lawful votes cast.

Issues

The appeal raised several significant issues regarding electoral law and qualifications:

1. Qualification of the 2nd respondent: Whether Buhari possessed the required educational qualifications as per the Constitution.
2. False Information in Affidavit: Whether Buhari submitted a false affidavit regarding his qualifications.
3. Majority Votes Controversy: Whether the declaration of Buhari as the winner was based on the majority of lawful votes.
4. Allegations of Non-Compliance: Alleged corrupt practices and other non-compliance with electoral regulations.
5. Admission of Evidence: Whether certain evidence was incorrectly admitted.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court ruled on the following:

1. Under Section 131 of the Constitution, candidates for the presidency must be educated at least to the secondary school level, defined further in Section 318 as including various equivalents without mandating the possession of all listed qualifications.
2. The claim that Buhari submitted false information was not proved as appellants did not satisfactorily demonstrate the falsity.
3. Claims regarding the majority of votes were based on unverified data from a disputed server, rendering such claims unsubstantiated.
4. Appellants must present credible evidence and witnesses from polling units to validate claims of electoral malpractice; failure to do so weakens their case.

Court Findings

The court found:

• Abubakar's arguments hinged on procedural non-compliance and substantive electoral fraud failed due to lack of evidence.
• Documentary evidence tendered without the presence of makers was deemed insufficient for establishing claims against the 2nd respondent.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming that the 2nd respondent, Muhammadu Buhari, was duly elected and qualified for the presidency, thus validating the election process upheld by INEC.

Significance

This ruling reinforces the importance of burden of proof in electoral disputes, establishing clear guidelines on the qualification of candidates and the evidentiary standards required for election petitions in Nigeria.