BEST LAW REPORT SUBSCRIPTION PRICE!!

  • Michael v. Yuosuo
  • 209
  • 2004-05-31
  • ₦ 200
  • Buy Now

Michael v. Yuosuo

KUMUSUONYO MICHAEL

V

AMALANYO YUOSUO

V

INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION

( INEC )

COURT OF APPEAL

( PORT HARCOURT DIVISION )

MICHAEL E. AKPIROROH, JCA ( Presided and Read the Lead Judgment )

ABOYI JOHN IKONGBEH, JCA

DAVID ADEDOYIN ADENIJI, JCA

CA/PH/EPT/214/2003

THURSDAY, 27TH NOVEMBER, 2003

APPEAL - Fresh issue on appeal - Where issue to be raised relates to the jurisdiction of court - Whether leave of the appellate court is required to raise

COURT - Appellate court - Leave of the appellate court to raise a fresh issue on appeal - Whether required where the issue to be raised relates to the jurisdiction of the court

COURT - Election matters - Undue technicalities therein - Duty on court to refrain from placing reliance on

COURT - Issue of standard of proof - Whether can be raised without leave of court

ELECTION PETITION - Returning officer, electoral officer - Joinder of in an election petition - Rationale for

ELECTORAL  MATTERS - Undue technicalities therein - Duty on court to refrain from placing reliance on

EVIDENCE - Standard of proof - Issue of - Whether can be raised without leave of court

JURISDICTION - Fresh issue to be raised on appeal - Where relates to the jurisdiction of court - Whether leave of the appellate court required therefor

PLEADINGS - Claim - Main claim and alternative claim -Whether can be granted at the same time

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Appellate court - Leave of the appellate court to raise a fresh issue on appeal - Whether required where the issue to be raised relates to the jurisdiction of the court

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Issue of standard of proof - Whether can be raised without leave of court

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Main claim and alternative claim -

Whether can be granted at the same time

Issues:

1.              Whether in the circumstances of this case the Election Tribunal had jurisdiction to entertain and determine the petition subject matter of this appeal.

2.              Whether exhibits A5 and B3 had any real evidential value in law to justify the reliance placed on them by the Election Tribunal in coming to the conclusion that the 1st respondent/ appellant was less than 30 years of age as at the time of contesting the election in issue.

3.              Whether the petitioner proved, and in accordance with the standard of proof required in law, that the 1st respondent was less than 30 years of age as at the time he contested the election in issue contrary to the information he supplied in the INEC Form CF001 which he completed for the purpose of the election.

4.              Whether the Honourable Tribunal applied the correct standard of proof and followed the right approach in the evaluation of evidence in relation to the petitioner’s allegation that voting

did not take place in certain polling stations in Ewoama Ward 3  and Ward 5 and if so, whether the petitioner proved that no election took place in the polling units as alleged?(Grounds 5 , 12 and 3 of the appellant’s grounds of appeal ).

5.              Whether the Election Tribunal was right in nullifying the election of the 1st respondent/appellant and in declaring the petitioner/respondent as the duly elected candidate? (Grounds 6 , 14 and 15 of the appellant’s grounds of appeal ).

Facts:

This appeal is from the decision of the Governorship and Legislative House Election Tribunal sitting at Yenagoa in Bayelsa State delivered on 16 th July, 2003 in which the Tribunal nullified the election of the appellant.

The facts of the case are that the 1st respondent/cross-appellant filed a petition dated the 2nd day of June, 2003 wherein he claimed inter alia:

1.             A declaration that the 13,410 votes allegedly scored by the 1st respondent in the aforesaid election are invalid and unlawful votes as the 1st respondent was not qualified to contest the Bayelsa State House of Assembly election in Brass Constituency 2.

2.             A declaration that the 1st respondent was accordingly not duly and validly elected and/or returned as the winner of the said Bayelsa State House of Assembly election in Brass Constituency 2.

3.             An order declaring the petitioner as the duly elected candidate for the Bayelsa State House of Assembly election, Brass Constituency 2 held on the 3rd day of May, 2003, the petitioner having scored the highest number of valid votes cast at the said election.

Sequel to the service of the copies of the petition on the 1st respondent, he entered appearance and filed a reply to the petition. At the end of the trial, the Tribunal nullified the election of the 1st respondent/cross-appellant on the ground that he was under the age of 30 years as at the date of the election.

Dissatisfied with the decision, the appellant has now appealed to the Court of Appeal.