Background
This case involved an election petition filed by the appellant, Momoh Rabiu Alfa, against Abdullahi Zakari, the duly elected member of the Kogi State House of Assembly for Ankpa II Constituency. Alfa alleged that Zakari was not duly elected due to corrupt practices and non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act. Following the filing of the petition, Zakari raised a preliminary objection, claiming that the petition was incompetent because it was not signed by the appellant or his counsel. The tribunal ruled in favor of Zakari, leading Alfa to appeal this decision.
Issues
The core issues raised in this case were:
- Whether the petition was duly signed by the appellant or his solicitor.
- Whether the tribunal appropriately raised the issue of signature at the stage it did, rather than during a pre-hearing session.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal held that:
- The court is empowered to either adopt the issues submitted by counsel or formulate its own that best address the appeal's concerns.
- An election petition is considered "sui generis", demanding strict compliance with procedural rules outlined in the Electoral Act.
- The absence of a signature from the petitioner or his solicitor rendered the petition invalid.
- The tribunal rightfully raised and addressed issues related to jurisdiction as they pertained to the validity of the petition.
Court Findings
The court found that:
- The signature is a mandatory requirement as outlined in the Electoral Act, specifically under paragraph 4(3)(b), indicating it must be signed by either the petitioner or their solicitor.
- The term "shall" in statutory language implies a mandatory requirement, where non-compliance results in the invalidity of the document.
- The court is obliged to declare any document unsigned as having no effect, highlighting the importance of maintaining rigorous standards in election petitions.
- The tribunal acted within its jurisdiction by addressing the signature issue at the hearing, affirming its authority to determine the competency of petitions presented to it.
Conclusion
The Court of Appeal upheld the lower tribunal’s ruling that the election petition was defective and could not proceed due to the lack of required signatures. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety.
Significance
This case underscores the critical importance of procedural compliance in election petitions, affirming that any deviation from statutory provisions can lead to the dismissal of a petition. It emphasizes the judiciary's role in upholding electoral integrity and the clear, unambiguous requirements set forth in electoral legislation.