Zamfara: Supreme Court Upholds Yari's Election
The Supreme Court has upheld the election of Abdulazeez Abubakar Yari of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as Governor of Zamfara State.
In a unanimous
decision, a five-man panel of the court dismissed the appeal by the candidate
of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the election, Mahmud Aliyu Shinkafi.
The court also upheld
the arguments of lawyer to Yari and the APC, Mahmud Magaji (SAN).
In a lead judgment read
by Justice John Inyang Okoro, the court resolved the two issues in the appeal
against the appellants (Shinkafi and PDP).
It then awarded N100,
000 cost against the appellants and in favour of Yari and his party.
On their complaint that
Yari was not qualified to contest the election on the ground that he did not
emerge from a valid primary, the court held that the appellants, not being
members of the APC or participants in the primary, lacked the locus to
challenge the outcome of the primary.
On the second issue of
alleged over-voting, the court held that the appellants "failed
woefully" to prove their allegation of over-voting.
Justice Okoro held
thus: "All I have said above is that the appellants had no locus standi to
challenge the election or nomination of the 1st respondent by his political
party, the APC at its primary election of December 4, 2014. The simple reason
being that they were not aspirants at the said primary election.
"According to
Section 87(9) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as ammended) only an aspirant, who
participated in a primary election can challenge it's outcome. The provision is
restrictive.
"From the findings
above, I agree with the court below that the appellants failed woefully to
prove over-voting in accordance with the principles laid down by law.
"The reliance on
the evidence of DW1, through a document he did not make has not made any
difference.
"There is no doubt
that a petitioner is entitled to contend that an election or return in an
election be invalidated by reason of corrupt practices or non-compliance with
the provisions of the Electoral Act.
"For a petitioner
to succeed on this ground, he has to prove (a): that the corrupt or
non-compliance took place: (b): that the corrupt practice or non-compliance
substantially affected the result of the election.
"There is need for
a petitioner, who alleges over-voting to lead concrete evidence to show that
there was indeed over-voting and that it inured to the winner of the contest.
Check This Day newspaper for the full story.
Comments
Post a Comment