Northern Nigerian Breaking News

Court of Appeal decides Sokoto governorship election Monday

The Appeal Court sitting in Abuja will on Monday deliver judgment on the appeal filed against the judgment of the state election petitions tribunal which affirmed the election of Governor Ahmed Aliyu of Sokoto State.

It could be recalled that the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party in the March 18 governorship election, Sai’du Umar, has challenged the declaration of Aliyu as the duly elected governor of the state, alleging irregularities among others.

However, in a notice of judgment from the court made available to reporters by the Special Assistant on Media to the PDP candidate in the state, Muhammad Lema, the judgment is expected to be delivered by 3 pm on Monday.

Read Also: Missing Radio Tower: NSCDC commences investigations

“Take notice that APPEAL NO, CA/S/EP/GOV/SK/30/2023: SAIDU UMAR & ANR VS. ALIYU AHMED SOKOTO & 3. ORS is coming up before the Court of Appeal Headquarters Abuja Division for judgment on Monday, the 27th day of November 2023 at 3.00 pm,” the notice read.

elsamad new

The three-man Election’s Petitions Tribunal led by Justice Haruna Msheila in a unanimous judgment delivered on September 30, dismissed the petition of the PDP, saying the petitioners failed to prove the six grounds formulated in the petition.

Justice Msheila said the grounds bordered on alleged ineligibility for Aliyu and Gobir to contest, falsification of certificates, variation of names, election frauds, and noncompliance with electoral guidelines.

Read Also: Terrorized by insecurity, denied quality healthcare: Inside Zamfara communities where the sick, pregnant women live in fear of death

He said petitioners were unable to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt as required by law as 70 percent of of exhibits were out of context because they relate to State Assembly elections conducted on the same dates.

Read Also:Meningitis Outbreak: Jigawa residents pay the price for govt’s healthcare failure

According to him, to prove forgery, two different documents of persons needed to be presented while the variation of names issues was settled by Supreme Court provisions.

He said three witnesses were not tenable as they were not makers of the documents from the alleged primary school while the other 28 polling unit agents who testified could not identify themselves along with their roles.

 

Comments are closed.