site logo

DIDE V. SELEKETIMIBI (2010)

case summary

Court of Appeal (Port Harcourt Division)

Before Their Lordships:

  • Suleiman Galadima JCA
  • Tijjani Abdullahi JCA
  • Ejembi Eko JCA

Parties:

Appellant:

  • Angos Dide Labour Party

Respondents:

  • Ebiotu Seleketimibi Peoples’ Democratic Party
  • Bayelsa State Resident Commissioner
  • Independent National Electoral Commission
  • The Constituency Returning/Collation Officer
Suit number: CA/PH/EPT/528/2008Delivered on: 2009-07-09

Background

The case of Dide v. Seleketimibi arose from the election results for the Ekeremor II Constituency in Bayelsa State, held on April 14, 2007. The 1st respondent, Ebiotu Seleketimibi, was declared the winner, prompting the petitioner, Angos Dide, to challenge the election result. Dide asserted that Seleketimibi had presented a forged certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and that he was the rightful winner based on valid votes cast.

Issues

The main issues addressed in this case included:

  1. Whether a declaration of age or place of birth qualifies as a 'certificate' under the law.
  2. If the petitioners presented sufficient evidence to prove that the 1st respondent submitted a forged certificate, leading to his disqualification under section 107 of the 1999 Constitution.
  3. Whether the tribunal correctly rejected evidence from the Bomadi High Court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the definition of 'certificate' encompasses any official document that attests to facts, including age declarations. It ruled that the evidence presented was adequate to prove that the certificate submitted by Seleketimibi was forged, thereby disqualifying him under section 107(1)(i) of the 1999 Constitution.

Court Findings

The key findings of the court included:

  • The definition of a certificate was broad enough to include age declarations when presented to INEC.
  • The evidence presented by the appellants, including contradictions in the 1st respondent’s sworn declarations of age, warranted the conclusion that a forged certificate had been submitted.
  • The tribunal had erred in dismissing the petitioner's claims and in its evaluation of evidence.

Conclusion

The appeal was allowed, nullifying the election results for the 1st respondent due to the proven forgery of the age declaration submitted to INEC.

Significance

This case is significant as it clarifies the interpretation of 'certificate' within electoral law, reinforcing the necessity for candidates to provide truthful information when filing to contest elections. It emphasizes the electoral commission's responsibility to verify candidate credentials, ensuring that integrity is upheld in the electoral process.

Counsel:

  • Preye Agedah Esq. (for Appellants)
  • Ebiyerin G. Omukoro Esq. (for 1st Respondent)