3PLR – ACTION CONGRESS OF NIGERIA V. SULE LAMIDO & ORS.
POLICY, PRACTICE AND PUBLISHING, LAW REPORTS 3PLR
[PDF copy of this judgment can be sent to your email for N300 only. Just order through lawnigeria@gmail.com and info@lawnigeria.com or text 07067102097]
ACTION CONGRESS OF NIGERIA
V.
SULE LAMIDO & ORS.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA
ON FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2012
SC.25/2012
3PLR/2012/2 (SC)
BEFORE THEIR LORDSHIPS
MAHMUD MOHAMMED, JSC
CHRISTOPHER MITCHELL CHUKWUMA-ENEH, JSC
MUHAMMAD SAIFULLAH MUNTAKA-COOMASSIE, JSC
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JSC
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JSC
BETWEEN
ACTION CONGRESS OF NIGERIA – Appellants
AND
- SULE LAMIDO
- PEOPLES’ DEMOCRATIC PARTY (PDP)
- INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION (INEC)
- THE PRESIDING OFFICER OF JIGAWA STATE
- THE CHIEF ELECTORAL COMMISSIONER OF JIGAWA STATE – Respondents
REPRESENTATION
Adamu Abubakar with Ismaila Bala and Laminu Bala – For Appellant
AND
O.E.B. Offiong SAN with Dr. G. O. A. Ogunyomi, F. J. Osumerha, K. B. Olawoyin, C. A. Fakoya, G. O. Uzu, A. I. Enenkwa, Moses E. Agwulonu – for 1st and 2nd Respondents
Ibrahim Isyaka SAN with B. A. Oyefeso for 3rd, 4th and 5th Respondents – For Respondent
ORIGINATING STATE
Jigawa state: Governorship Election petition Tribunal
MAIN ISSUES
ELECTION PETITION:- Petition challenging the election and return of a candidate as Governor-Elect – Duty of petitioner to prove same by sufficient evidence – Legal effect of failure thereto
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – APPEAL:- Concurrent findings of lower courts – Proper treatment of by Supreme Court
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – EVIDENCE:– Proof of case – Failure to provide sufficient evidence – Duty of court thereto
MAIN JUDGMENT
MAHMUD MOHAMMED, J.S.C. (Delivering the Leading Judgment):
This is an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal delivered on 14th December, 2011 dismissing the Appellant’s appeal against the decision of the Governorship Election petition Tribunal, sitting at Dutse Jigawa state dismissing the Appellant’s petition, challenging the election and return of the 1st Respondent as the Governor of Jigawa State of Nigeria in the Governorship election conducted by the 3rd Respondent on 26th April, 2011.
The Appellant’s Notice of Appeal filed on 20th December, 2011 contains 15 grounds of appeal from which 9 issues were distilled in the Appellant’s brief of argument.
The 1st and 2nd Respondents who filed a joint Respondent’s brief on the other hand formulated 8 issues while the 3rd – 5th Respondents who filed a joint Respondent’s brief of argument, framed 6 issues for the determination of the appeal.
Having carefully read the proceedings of the two Courts below in the record of this appeal and also examined and considered the relevant issues for the determination of this appeal in the relevant briefs of argument filed on behalf of the parties, I am satisfied that all the issues are rooted in the question of whether or not taking into consideration of the evidence on record, the two courts below were right in their concurrent judgments that the Appellant as petitioner before the Governorship Election Petition Tribunal and as Appellant before the Court of Appeal, had failed to prove its case to warrant being granted the reliefs sought in its election petition. In this respect, I entirely agree with the two courts below that having regard to the evidence on record, the Appellant’s petition and its appeal to the Court of Appeal were rightly dismissed. In the same vein, the Appellant’s appeal to this court against the judgment of the Court of Appeal of 14th December, 2011, must suffer the same fate. The appeal is accordingly hereby dismissed. The judgment of the Court of Appeal affirming the judgment of the Governorship Election Petition Tribunal of Jigawa State dismissing the Appellants petition on 24th October, 2011, is hereby further affirmed with no order on costs. I shall give my full reasons for dismissing the appeal on 24th February, 2012.
MUHAMMAD SAIFULLAHI MUNTAKA-COOMASSIE, J.S.C.:
Having read the record of proceedings and the briefs filed by the learned counsel for the parties in this appeal I agree that appeal is completely devoid of merits, same is hereby dismissed. I will give my reasons for the dismissal on Friday 24th February 2010.
- A. FABIYI, J.S.C.:
I agree with my learned brother – Mahmud Muhammad, JSC that based on the concrete concurrent findings of the trial Tribunal and the Court of Appeal on all vital points in issue, I feel convinced that the appeal is devoid of merit and should be dismissed. I order accordingly.
Deo Volente, I shall give fuller reasons on 24th February, 2012.
