BREAKING: NNPP Files Governorship Election Case At Supreme Court, Lists 10 Grounds Of Error By Court Of Appeal
The New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP) has filed its appeal at the Supreme Court asking the apex court to set aside the ruling of the Court of Appeal which upheld the tribunal sacking of the Kano State governor, Kabir Yusuf.
According to the Court filings on Wednesday, the NNPP in the suit, listed 10 grounds of error by the Court of Appeal, which it pleaded with the Supreme Court to examine and void.
The case is between the NNPP as appellant, Governor Yusuf Kabir as first respondent, the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the second respondent and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the third respondent.
“NOTICE OF APPEAL: TAKE NOTICE that the APPELLANT being dissatisfied with the Judgment of the Court of Appeal sitting at Abuja on appeal from the decision of the Kano State Governorship Petition Tribunal and Coram Hon. Justices Moore Aseimo Abraham Adumein; Bitrus Gyarazama Sanga and Lateef Adebayo Ganiyu JICA in Appeal No. CA/KN/EP/GOV/34/2023 delivered on 17th Day of November, 2023 Between Yusuf Abba Kabir and All Progressives Congress (APC), INDEPENDENT NATIONAL Electoral Commission (INEC) and NEW NIGERIA PEOPLES Party (NNPP) do hereby appeal to the Supreme Court on the grounds set out in paragraphs 3 below and will at the hearing of the appeal, seek the relief(s) set out in paragraph 4.
“AND TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that the names and addresses of the persons directly affected by the Appeal are those set out in paragraph 5,” the party said.
“1.0 PART OF THE DECISION OF THE LOWER COURT COMPLAINED OF The entire Judgment save and except the final conclusion and orders at page 67 of the duly certified true copy thereof including order as to cost favourable to the Appellant to wit that: “The Judgement of the tribunal in petition No.: EPT/KN/GOBV/021/2023 between: ALL PROGRESSIVES CONGRESS (APC) v INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELRECTORAL COMMISION & 2 ORS. delivered on the 200 day f September, 2023 is hereby sets aside. The sum of N-1,000,000.00 (One million naira only) is hereby awarded as cost in favour of the appellant and against the first respondent,” the document read.
“GROUNDS OF APPEAL: GROUND 1 The learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law and occasioned a grave miscarriage of justice to the prejudice of the Appellant, when having concurrently held as did the trial tribunal, at page 2 of their judgment that, “The appellant contested the aforententioned governorship election on the platform of the New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP) and was declared the winner by the yu respondent with a total of 1,019,602; while the I” respondent, which sponsored one NASIRU YUSUF GAWUNA, was said to have scored a total of 890,705 votes..” their lordships proceeded to hold at page 60 thus:
“When section 134 (1 (a) of the Electoral Act, 2022 is juxtaposed and read in conjunction with section 177 (c) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, (as amended), it is clear that a door or at least a window, of jurisdiction has been opened to a court or tribunal to entertain and determine a claim or an assertion in an election petition that the person, whose election has been challenged, was not qualified to contest the election because he was not a member of a political party,”
“PARTICULARS OF ERROR; (1)The decision of the tribunal on issue of party membership was in favour of the Appellant and 1st Respondent. (2) The decision of the tribunal on issue of party membership was not challenged in the instant appeal to the court of appeal. (3) The Court of appeal reviewed and reversed the Tribunals’ judgment that went in favour of Appellant and 1″ Respondent on issue of party membership when no ground of appeal or issue was formulated to warrant such a review.
“(4) The 1″ Respondent as the only appellant in the court below in the instant appeal, limited his dissatisfaction with the judgment of the tribunal but expressly left out “…the portions where objections were resolved in favour of the Appellant (1st Respondent).”
“(5) The objections resolved by the trial Tribunal in favour of the Appellant and 1 Respondent, encompassed question of non-qualification of 1″ Respondent on account of failure to have his name in Appellant’s membership register submitted to 3rd Respondent under section 77 (2) and (3) of the Electoral Act 2022 before party primaries. (6) There was no cross appeal by 2nd respondent to warrant the reopening and resolution of the issue of non-qualification of 1 Respondent by the court below.
“(7) The court below lacked jurisdiction to delve into issue of non-qualification of 1″ respondent on which there was no appeal before the court of appeal in the instant appeal.
(8) Allegation of presenting an unqualified candidate to contest election is an infraction for which a political party is liable to a fine of ten million naira where properly raised and established.
“(9) Allegation of presenting an unqualified candidate to contest election being a criminal offence could not be raised and determined suo motu on appeal as the court of appeal did. (10) The entire judgment of the court below would have had no premise or platform to anchor a finding of non-qualification of the Appellant to field the 15″ Respondent at the Kano state governorship election of 18th March, 2023 but for the gratuitous finding by their lordships.
“GROUND 2 – The court of appeal erred in law, and came to a perverse decision when their lordships mixed up issue of party membership register for use at party primaries with qualification to contest general election, thus holding at pages 61-62 of their judgment, that “…it is settled law that membership of a political party is a domestic or internal affair of the party concerned, the political party cannot, be permitted to circumvent and breach the clear and mandatory provisions of section. 177 (c) of the Constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended). It is trite that for a person to qualify as a candidate for a general election, he must n tony be a member of a political party but he mis have been sponsored for the election by his political party…
“Section 77 subsection (2) and (3) of the Electoral Act, 2022 make it mandatory for a political party to maintain a register of its members and such membership register must be made available to the independent National Electoral Commission (the 1st Cross respondent).”
“GROUND 3 The learned Justice of the court of appeal misdirected themselves in law by misapprehending the issue in the appeal before their lordships when they delved into alternative hypothetical scenario that party register could sustain ground of disqualification of 1st Respondent if the objection to the ground had not been upheld; and thus disqualified Appellants’ candidate by holding at page 63 of the judgment to overrule the trial court thus:
“”If, as rightly, found by the tribunal, that the appellant – Yusuf Abba -Kabir was not a member of the 3rd respondent- New Nigerian Peoples Party, at the time he was purportedly sponsored for the governorship election held on the 18th day of March, 2023; the he was not qualified to contest the election by virtue of section 177 (c) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended). A court must be consistent in its judgment; it should not allow not (sic) itself to approbate and reprobate over an issue, …the Tribunal was wrong not to have disqualified the appellant. The law is that: Fiat justicia, ruat coelum.” “Let justice be done, though heavens fall”
“GROUND 4. The learned Justices of the court of appeal erred in law, misapplied binding judicial precedents, breach ed Appellant’s right to fair hearing, and thus came to a decision that occasioned miscarriage of justice to the Appellant when they held at pages 64-65 of the judgment, inter alia:
“At this juncture, it is perhaps, necessary to clarify that the decision of this court in Peter Gregory Obi & Anor v. Independent National Electoral Commissioner (sic) and 3 Ors. (Unreported Appeal No. CA/PEPVC/03/2023 delivered on the 6th day of September, 2023) is not applicable to this case as the issue in that case was whether the Isty Petitioner, who was a member of another political party before leaving it to join another political party which eventually sponsored him for the general election, had locus standi to present his election petition. In this case, the evidence before the tribunal was that the appellant was not a member of a political party respondent before purporting to contest the disputed election. the 3rd
“What the tribunal did was to technically waive the mandatory provisions of section 177 (c) of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 199 (as amended) the law is that statutory provisions must be given effect and thy should not be waived. See……
“It is also settled that a court should not decide any case on the basis of empathy or sentiments but only on the facts and the law presented before it.
“GROUND 5 The learned Justices of the court of appeal erred in law, acted without jurisdiction and breached the Appellant’s right to fair hearing thus coming to a wrong conclusion, on the actual issue submitted for their resolution regarding the trial Tribunal’s assumption of the role of Petitioners by reviewing documents dumped or the court, in the Tribunal Justices chambers, whereof the tribunal arbitrarily discovered, isolated and deducted 165,000 votes from the total votes of 1,019, 602 and recounted the remainder of votes cast for appellant and its candidate (1st Respondent) to conclude that the All Progressives Congress’s candidate who scored 890,705 votes at the election had more votes and ought to have been returned as the winner of the Governorship election held in Kano state on 18th March, 2023 when:
“GROUND 6 The Court below erred in law when it held that the Appellant’s Candidate was not a member of NNPP( the political party that sponsored him for Governorship election in Kano State), and therefore not qualified to contest the said election. :
“Ground 7 The Court below erred in law when it held that the Appellant’s candidate should have personally given evidence to establish his Membership of his Party and that such failure to testify is fatal to his case.
“Ground 8 The Court below erred In law when it upheld the decision of the Tribunal nullifying the election of the Appellant’s Candidate as elected Governor of Kano State and declaring 1st Respondent’s Candidate as the winner instead.
“GROUND 9 The Learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law and occasioned a grave miscarriage of justice when they held ” that the live issues in this appeal are hereby resolved in favour of the Respondent and against the Appellant” when the issue of the constitutionality of the judgment of the Election Tribunal delivered in violation of the mandatory provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) was not properly considered.
“Ground 10 The Learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law when they held ” if, as rightly found by the Tribunal, that the Appellant Yusuf Abba Kabir was not a member of the 1st Respondent- New Nigeria Peoples Party” at the time he purportedly sponsored for the Governorship election held on the 18th day of March 2023, then he was not qualified to contest the election by virtue of Section 177 (c) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended)…The Tribunal was wrong to not have disqualified the Appellant” and thereby occassioned a grave miscarriage of justice.
“RELIEFS SOUGHT (i) AN ORDER ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE the judgment of the Court of Appeal delivered on 17th November, 2023. (ii) AN ORDER upholding the portion of the judgment of the court of appeal setting aside the judgment of the trial Tribunal in Petition No: EPT/RV/GOV/11/2023 and making order as to costs in favour of the Appellant.
(iii) SUCH FURTHER ORDER(S) as this Honourable Court may deem appropriate in the circumstances of the appeal.”
