DR. OGO ELLA & ORS. V. ELLA AGBO & ANR.

CORAM

DENNIS ONYEJIFE EDOZIE

ISAIAH OLUFEMI AKEJU

MUHAMMAD SAIFULLAHI MUNT AKA-COOMASSIE, JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

DAHIRU MUSDAPHER JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

PARTIES

1. DR. OGO ELLA2. INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION (INEC)3. RESIDENT ELECTORAL COMMISSIONER, BENUE STATE4. PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC PARTY5. ELECTORAL RETURNING OFFICER, BENUE STATE APPELLANTS

1. ELLA AGBO2. OCHEPO ADA EJIGA RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

In an election into the National Assembly for Oturkpo/Ohimmini Federal Constituency of Benue State, the 1st Appellant, Dr. Ogo Ella (also known as Dr. Ella Ogo Ella) and the 1st Respondent Ella Agbo (Alias Ada Ochepo Ejiga) contested as candidates respectively for the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the All Peoples Party (APP) with the former being declared the winner and the elected candidate for the constituency. Consequently, the 1st Respondent Ella Agbo as petitioner filed a petition before the National Assembly Election Tribunal Benue State against the Appellant Dr. Ogo Ella, the 2nd Respondent Ochepo Ada Ejiga, 2nd, 3rd. 4th and 5th Appellants herein as 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Respondents. The 1st Respondent in his petition prayed that the purported election of the 1st Appellant be annulled on the ground that the 4th Appellant (PDP) presented two candidates for the election, viz 1st Appellant, Dr. Ogo Ella and the 2nd Respondent, Ochepo Ada Ejiga and that the 1st Respondent be declared duly elected. Prior to the 1st Respondent’s petition, the 2nd Respondent herein, Ochepo Ada Ejiga had filed a petition before the same Tribunal with the 1st and 2nd Appellants herein as 1st and 2nd Respondents. The 2nd Respondent Ochepo Ada Ejiga complained that the 1st Appellant was disqualified by reason of non-payment of tax for the relevant period and that he was validly nominated as the PDP candidate to contest the e1ection, but was unlawfully excluded from participating therein. He therefore prayed, inter alia, that he be deemed as the only lawful candidate on the platform of the PDP to be entitled to the majority votes cast for that party. The two petitions were consolidated by the Tribunal with the 1st Respondent regarded as the 1st Petitioner with his petition as the 1st petition while the 2nd Respondent as the 2nd Petitioner and his petition as the second petition. At the conclusion of the trial, the Tribunal held that the PDP did not present two candidates to contest the election. On the other hand, the Tribunal found that the 1st Appellant was not validly nominated for the election. It then concluded that the 2nd Respondent was unlawfully excluded from contesting the election in violation of Section 79(1)(d) of Decree No. 5 of 1999. Accordingly it nullified the election and ordered INEC to conduct a bye-election with the 2nd Respondent as a candidate on the platform of PDP. Dissatisfied with the decision of the Tribunal, the Appellants lodged three appeals to the Court of Appeal.

HELD

Appeals Dismissed

ISSUES

? Whether the Tribunal was in error in holding that the PDP did not present two candidates for the election within the purview of Section 79 (4) of Decree No, 5 of 1999? Whether the 2nd Respondent was validly nominated but was unlawfully excluded from the election.? Whether or not the Tribunal was right when it held that the 1st Appellant was not validly nominated.? Whether the reliefs granted by the Tribunal were proper.