 |
| Seriake Dickson |
Former Bayelsa State Governor Timipre Sylva and his party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), have appealed the July 26 judgment of the state’s Election Petition Tribunal, which upheld the return of Seriake Dickson as winner of the last governorship election.
In the appeal, filed by their lawyer, Sebastine Hon (SAN), before the Court of Appeal in Abuja on August 14, Sylva faulted the tribunal’s judgment and raised 24 grounds of appeal.
They argued, among others, that the three-member tribunal, led by Justice Kazeem Alogba, misled itself, misapplied the law and came to a wrong verdict.
Sylva and APC asked the Court of Appeal to, among others, set aside the judgment and grant his reliefs as contained in his petition or the alternative reliefs, including the cancellation of the poll and ordering a fresh election.
The former governor and his party argued that the tribunal erred in law when it held that the reasons given by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to cancel the election was within the provision Section 26(1) of the Electoral Act (EA) 2010.
They argued that Section 26(1) of the Electoral Act has no provision for “cancellation” of election, but “postponement” of election.
“The phrase, ‘other emergencies’ under Section 26(1) E A, is limited to the action of INEC ‘postponing’ an election and not ‘cancelling one that had already taken place,” they said.
The appellants, who noted that Sylva’s major complaint was that INEC’s Electoral Officer in the state acted unlawfully by cancelling the result of elections already held in Southern Ijaw Local Government Area on December 6, last year, also said the tribunal was wrong to have upheld INEC’s claim that the election was postponed.
Sylva and APC also faulted the tribunal for allegedly making contradictory findings.
The appellants noted that since Form EC8A contained the polling unit results of election in Southern Ijaw Local Government Area, INEC should not have said no valid election was held in the area on December 6.
They argued that the tribunal’s judges “misdirected themselves in law when they held that the appellant (Sylva) failed to prove and or tender any document showing that election results had been uploaded on the database of INEC before the cancellation of the election and that such failure not only meant abandonment of pleading but withholding of evidence, which, if tendered, would be fatal to the appellants”.
Sylva and APC also faulted the tribunal, arguing that its judges erred in law when, in their alleged haste to dismiss the complaint on Southern Ijaw Local Government Area, refused to evaluate the appelants’ evidence to prove their case.
They faulted the tribunal for failing to void Dickson’s election when it found, through credible evidence, that the combined result of election recorded by both candidates was 48,146 less than the over 120,000 total registered voters in Southern Ijaw Local Government Area.
The appellants argued that the tribunal erred in law when, despite the strong case they made and proved, the tribunal still held that Dickson was validly elected.
“The trial tribunal erred in law and thereby occasioned a miscarriage of justice when it failed to make a definite pronouncement on the effect of the cancelled votes being more than the difference between the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and APC.
“The judges of the lower tribunal erred in law when they failed to give a ruling on the objection that exhibits R23 (A -J) – R33 (A -N) tendered by the first respondent were dumped on the tribunal, yet accorded the presumption of regularity in favour of the exhibits and attached weight to them and relied on exhibits R23AJ – 36(A – I) in its judgment,” the appellants said.
