The Appeal Court in Abuja affirmed the election Kaduna State Governor Uba Sani and set aside the order by the tribunal which declared the governorship election in the state inconclusive.
Sani of the All Progressives Congress (APC) had polled 730, 001 votes to defeat his closest rival, Isah Ashiru, of the Peoples Democratic Party who scored 719, 196 votes.
Dissatisfied by the outcome of the election, Ashiru argued that Sani did not score the majority of the lawful votes in the election.
He also claimed that the margin of lead was less than the total number of people who collected their PVCs in the polling units where the election was cancelled/not held.
Delivering its judgment on the matter, the Kaduna State Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal, in a split decision, declared the governorship election inconclusive.
The tribunal led by Justice Victor Oviawie directed that a supplementary election should be held by the Independent National Electoral Commission within 90 days.
The tribunal ruled further that INEC is to conduct elections in seven wards, four local governments, and 24 polling units comprising 16,300 registered voters.
Ashiru later approached the Court of Appeal, asking the appellate court to set aside the judgment of the tribunal on the matter.
Delivering judgment in the matter on Friday, the appellate court held that the evidence relied on by the tribunal to declare the election inconclusive had discrepancies.
The appellate court also agreed with the tribunal that the petitioners abandoned their petition after failing to apply for the issuance of a pre-hearing information sheet following the close of pleadings as required by paragraph 18(1) of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act 2022.
The appeal court further agreed with the argument of the lead lawyer to Governor Sani, Chief Bayo Ojo (SAN) and concurred with the tribunal that the appellants contravened the provision of the Electoral Act for failing to front-load the list of some of its witnesses along with its petition.
The three-member panel of the appellate court led by Justice Obietonbara Daniel-Kalio, held that the evidence relied on by the tribunal to declare the election inconclusive had discrepancies.
Justice Daniel-Kalio said, “The tribunal relied on evidence which in itself queried. The tribunal ought not to have given probative value to them. The tribunal accepted evidence of PW2 that it held to be hearsay. It ought not to have done so.
“The tribunal ought not to have relied on a document that showed discrepancies. The tribunal was wrong to have declared the election inconclusive and ordered a supplementary election in 22 polling units. The judgment is hereby set aside.”
