- PDP came empty-handed left empty-handed, say justices
- ’No evidence Sanwo-Olu forged school result’
- ’No evidence Hamzat renounced Nigerian
- citizenship’
The State and National Assembly Appeal Court sitting in Lagos yesterday affirmed the victory of Mr. Babajide Sanwo-Olu and Dr. Obafemi Hamzat as the validly elected winners of the March 18 election for the Office of the Governor and Deputy Governor of Lagos State.
A three-member panel of justices, in a unanimous decision, dismissed two appeals challenging the decisions of the Lagos State Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal, which unanimously affirmed Sanwo-Olu and Hamzat’s victory.
The same panel comprising Justices Yagata Nimpar, Samuel Bola and Paul Bassi heard both appeals and heard that both appeals failed “in their entirety and same is hereby dismissed.”
They resolved all the issues against the appellants in the first appeal filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate Mr. Olajide Adediran.
They also resolved all the issues against the appellants in the second appeal filed by the Labour Party (LP) candidate, Mr. Gbadebo Rhodes-Vivour.
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on Saturday, March 18, 2023 conducted an election for the Office of the Governor of Lagos State.
The frontrunners were Sanwo-Olu, Rhodes Vivour and Adeniran popularly known as Jandor. Other political parties also sponsored candidates.
At the conclusion of the poll, the electoral umpire on March 20, 2023 announced the results.
It declared and returned the incumbent, Sanwo-Olu, as winner, having scored 762,134 votes to beat his closest rival, Rhodes Vivour, who polled 312,329 votes. Adeniran came a distant third with 62,499 votes.
Dissatisfied, Rhodes Vivour and Adeniran filed separate petitions
challenging the election result and INEC’s declaration.
Adediran and the PDP had claimed that at the time of the election, Sanwo-Olu and Hamzat were not qualified to contest the election.
They also claimed that Sanwo-Olu failed to attach a copy of the GCE O/Level result he claimed to have sat for in 1981 along with his form EC9 as required by the Electoral Act 2022.
According to them, Sanwo-Olu’s result was a forgery.
They further alleged that Hamzat was disqualified from running for election, saying he was an American who had taken an oath of allegiance as a citizen of the United States, while also renouncing his citizenship of Nigeria.
But they also failed at the second hurdle, with the tribunal dismissing their claims as unproven.
The tribunal held, among others, that they failed to prove their allegations of the All Progressives Congress (APC)’s and its candidate’s substantial non-compliance with the Electoral Law as well as the guidelines of INEC, when nominating Sanwo-Olu and Hamzat.
The petitioners repeated several of their claims at the appellate court.
But delivering its judgments yesterday, the tribunal was unanimous that the appellants failed to prove their claims.
Adeniran was the first appellant while his party was the second.
Justice Nimpar, who read the lead judgment against Adeniran and the PDP held that they failed woefully to prove their claims.
She noted, for instance, that the appellants attempted to reopen their case and introduce new issues that were not raised at the tribunal.
“It is settled that even in normal proceedings, there are rules. It is wrong for the appellant to reopen their case and introduce new issues.
“It was illegal to introduce an unpleaded fact at the tribunal. The appellants went against that law and cannot complain. The tribunal was right to strike out the additional list of witness,” she held.
The court further held that complaint by the appellants that they were deprived of fair hearing could not be substantiated.
“From that fact in the record of this court, there is no denial of fair hearing.’
On the matter of forgery of results and non-qualification against Sanwo-Olu, as alleged by the appellants, the court was emphatic that it was baseless.
It agreed with the tribunal that the issues were pre-election matters and ordinarily ought not to have been heard by an election tribunal.
Justice Nimpar noted that nevertheless the tribunal, in the interest of justice, decided to distill the issues and its decision was sound.
“Even though they were all pre-election matters, the appellants (PDP and Adeniran) still failed to prove them,” the justice held.
She agreed with the tribunal that allegation of forgery is a criminal matter that must be proved beyond any doubt, and was not a matter for the tribunal.
“The school did not disclose the said result. Nobody from the school testified. There was no evidence that the document was forged. The tribunal was right to jettison the allegation of forgery. Conflicting figure is of exam number all came from the appellants,” the court held.
The court reasoned that once the appellants’ evidence is conflicting, it negatively affects the appellants’ case.
“The appellants came empty-handed and left empty-handed. They merely enjoyed their day in court.
“The decision of the lower court is affirmed and the appeal is hereby dismissed for lacking in merit,” the court added.
For the second appeal, the court, presided over by Justice Bola, also upheld the tribunal’s judgment and resolved all issues against Gbadebo and the LP.
It held unanimously that the lower tribunal was correct to hold that Sanwo-Olu and his deputy Dr. Obafemi Hamzat, were qualified to contest, contrary to the claims of Gbadebo.
It noted that the appellant failed to demonstrate their allegations with documentary evidence.
The justices noted that the “expert” witness who testified on US immigration laws as against Hamzat’s US citizenship provided “no scintilla of evidence to demonstrate her evidence.
“In other words, she did not see any oath of allegiance (to America) that she claimed the 3rd respondent (Hamzat) made.”
They held that “No case of renunciation of citizenship has been established by the LP candidate against the 3rd respondent (Hamzat) in accordance with the constitution. No evidence of oath of allegiance to the United States and renunciation of Nigerian citizenship was placed before the tribunal.
“No document to prove that the 3rd respondent (Hamzat) was no longer a citizen of Nigeria. It is incumbent on the appellants (LP, Gbadebo) to prove their claim. The document were found to be computer generated evidence it is significant to note that that there was scintilla of evidence that the 2nd respondents sworn to oath of allegiance”.
The court further noted that both Sanwo-Olu and Dr. Hamzat were duly sponsor by their political party, the APC.
It held unanimously that the lower tribunal was correct to hold that Sanwo-Olu and his deputy Dr. Obafemi Hamzat were qualified to contest, contrary to the claims of Gbadebo.
