Hon. Sani Sha’aban & Anor. V. Alhaji Namadi Sambo & Ors. (2009)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

AHMAD OLAREWAJU BELGORE, J.C.A.

Results of the governorship election for Kaduna State were declared on the 15th day of April, 2007 and Alhaji Namadi Sambo of the People Democratic Party (PDP) was returned as the winner of the election. Alhaji Namadi Sambo is the 1st Respondent in this appeal. The election was conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission, the 2nd Respondent herein, while the Resident Electoral Commissioner for Kaduna State, who was the Returning Officer for the State announced the results, returned and declared the 1st Respondent as the elected Governor of Kaduna State. The Resident Electoral Commission is the 3rd Respondent herein.

Hon. Sani M. Sha’aban and Joel Kwassau Giwa contested the same election as Governorship and Deputy Governorship candidates respectively on the platform of the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP). They are the 1st and 2nd Appellants respectively herein.

The Appellants were aggrieved by the results of the election and the declaration of the 1st Respondent as the winner and the elected Governor of Kaduna State. They filed an election petition before the Governorship and Legislative Houses Election Tribunal (now the Tribunal) on the 15th day of May, 2007.

The Parties went into a pre-hearing session and at the end of the session, a Report was issued as prescribed by the law. Thereafter and precisely on the 24th day of October, 2007 the Appellants filed a notice of motion praying, inter alia, for: –

“1. Leave to apply to file additional witness depositions in the Petition;

2. Leave to file additional witness depositions in the Petition
3. Leave to lead evidence of documents not filed with the Petition including video tapes and photographs, reports and other documents relevant to the petition;
4. An order deeming as properly filed and served the additional deposition already filed and served in this petition.

The application was filed pursuant to paragraphs 4(8) and 6(2) of the Election Tribunal and Court Practice Directions, 2007. As expected, the motion was vehemently opposed by all the Respondents. Written addresses were filed and exchanged by parties.

The motion was taken by the tribunal on the 8th day of November, 2007 and in a considered ruling delivered on the 15th day of November, 2007, dismissed the motion in the terms hereinafter appearing: –

“Although the case of Osho Vs. Foreign Finance Corporation (Supra) state the settled principle of law that parties are bound by their pleadings, what the case further highlighted concerning evidence of fact not pleaded cannot be of assistance in election petition. This is so because in election petitions all facts on which evidence will be led must be filed along with the petition i.e. the front loading system.

Having put all our views enumerated above into consideration, we hold that the 4 prayers sought in this application lack merit. They are accordingly dismissed.”

The petition proceeded to hearing after the ruling and the Appellants being dissatisfied with the ruling have brought this appeal by filing a Notice of Appeal consisting of six grounds of appeal. The relief sought from this Court are as follows:-

“a. That the appeal be allowed and the decision of the tribunal refusing the filing of witness deposition on inspection of documents set aside.

b. The witness deposition of Abdullahi Balarabe be deemed as property filed and served before the Tribunal

This Notice of Appeal was filed on the 24th day of November, 2007 and the 1st Respondent filed a Notice of Intention to Rely on Preliminary Objection. The main thrust of this Objection is that this Court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain interlocutory appeal which arises in the course of proceedings before an election tribunal.