BUHARI V. I.N.E.C. (2008)

Background

The case Buhari v. I.N.E.C. centers on the allegations made by General Muhammadu Buhari and Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, who contested the Presidential Elections held on 21 April 2007 on the platforms of the All Nigeria Peoples’ Party (ANPP) and Action Congress (AC), respectively. They challenged the election results that favored Umaru Musa Yar’Adua of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), who was declared the winner with 24,784,227 votes against Buhari's 6,607,400 votes. The petitioners alleged that the 5th respondent, Yar’Adua, was not qualified to participate in the election due to non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2006 and corrupt practices.

Issues

The appeal raised numerous issues for consideration by the court:

1. Was the 5th respondent qualified to contest?
2. Were there acts of non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2006 that rendered the elections invalid?
3. Were there corrupt practices during the elections that could invalidate the results?
4. Were the petitioners entitled to the reliefs they sought?
5. Was the petition valid after raising grounds of unlawful exclusion along with other claims?

Ratio Decidendi

The court upheld that the petitioner must prove that any non-compliance affected the election's outcome to establish a prima facie case for the petitioner's claims to succeed. Furthermore, it ruled that the grounds for unlawful exclusion cannot be invoked together with other grounds under the same section of the Electoral Act as they are mutually exclusive.

Court Findings

The court made several noteworthy findings:

1. The Presidential Election was found consistent with substantial compliance with the Electoral Act.
2. No substantive evidence was provided of unlawful exclusion.
3. Non-joinder of an official as a party does not invalidate the petition when the principal party is involved.
4. No evidence indicated that the change in voting times affected election integrity.
5. Ballot papers not being serially numbered did not, on its own, invalidate the election results.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the court dismissed the petitions for lack of substantive evidence supporting the claims of non-compliance and corrupt practices. The majority of complaints were seen as trivial and insufficient to alter the election result.

Significance

This case underscores the importance of substantial compliance in electoral processes and highlights judicial interpretation of electoral laws in Nigeria. It establishes a precedent for how allegations of corrupt practices and non-compliance must be substantiated to warrant the nullification of election results.