By Samuel Itsede
The court of Appeal Abuja, division has okayed the judgment of the Taraba State Governorship Election Tribunal which affirmed the re-election of Governor Darius Ishaku of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) in the March 9 governorship election in the state.
A three-man panel of the Tribunal led by Justice M O Adewara had in a unanimous judgment of September 20 dismissed the petition by the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its candidate, Abubakar Danladi, on the grounds that the petitioners failed to prove their claims that the election was marred by irregularities and substantial non-compliance with the Electoral Act.
In affirming the judgment of the Tribunal, the five-man panel of the Court of Appeal led by Justice C N Uwa held that the appellant had no candidate in the March 9 election in Taraba State by virtue of the disqualification of its candidate, Abubakar Danladi, by the Jalingo division of the Federal High Court on March 6, 2019.
Before the verdict, the appellate court had dismissed the preliminary objections filed by the three respondents against the appeal for lacking in merit.
Delivering judgment on the main appeal, the appellate court held that the APC had no candidate in the March 9, 2019 governorship election given the judgment of the Federal High Court sitting in Jalingo, Taraba State, which disqualified its candidate, Abubakar Sani Danladi, and equally restrained his political party, the APC, from fielding him as its governorship candidate.
That having failed to overturn the order of the Federal High Court that disqualified him at the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court, respectively, Danlandi himself withdrew his participation at the Tribunal.
“The first petitioner, having withdrawn from the Tribunal by virtue of his disqualification, the three reliefs he sought were no longer grantable as they stand abandoned by his withdrawal,” the court held.
The court further held that “the judgment of the Federal High Court remained binding on all parties having not been set aside by the Court of Appeal.
“The judgment of the Federal High Court having not been upturned took effect on March 6, 2019. It is erroneous to hold that the disqualification took effect in July.”
On the issue of stay of execution of the order of the Federal High Court by the Court of Appeal, the court held that the stay did not overrule the judgment of the Federal High Court and that of the Supreme Court.
“A disqualified candidate cannot be said to have participated in an election. Section 141 of the Electoral Act prohibits the court from declaring a party a winner of an election in which he has not fully participated,” it was stated.
On the issue of substitution of Danlandi with his deputy, the court held that “a disqualified candidate cannot be substituted long after an election. A disqualified party in an election has no candidate and cannot claim votes cast as the votes all amounted to wasted votes.
“By section 285 (13) of the 1999 constitution, a deputy candidate cannot be substituted for a principal candidate. The proposed deputy governor was only a nominee of the principal candidate after the primary election. The deputy governor sunk with the disqualified candidate.
“Substitution is not allowed where there is an incompetent candidate. When the nomination of a party is invalid, the party has no candidate.
“The law does not allow a political party to challenge an election which it did not participate.”
The court also held that the appellant failed to prove allegations of over-voting by not tendering relevant electoral documents, including voters registrar, statement of results, among others to demonstrate and prove the alleged over-voting.
“Rather than tendering voters registrar and other relevant documents, the appellant relied on Smart Card Readers at the Tribunal,” it was held.
“I agree with the counsel to the 2nd respondent, Chief Solo Akuma, SAN, that no evidence was led to show were over-voting occurred. The appellant failed completely in proving over-voting.
