A five-member panel of justices on has unanimously declared Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf the winner of March 18 governorship election in Kano State.
The panel also set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Abuja which nullified the election of Governor Yusuf.
It held that the lower court misunderstood the import of the purported deduction of 165,616 ballot papers in favour of Governor Yusuf.
Delivering the lead judgment on Friday, January 11, Justice Inyang Okoro held that the issue of Governor Yusuf’s membership of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) was a pre-election matter.
He said the finding that by Section 177(c) of the Nigerian Constitution and Section 134(1) of the Electoral Act, Governor Yusuf was not sponsored by the NNPP, was not a finding of the electoral tribunal but a mere observation that his name was not contained in the membership list.
“This court has consistently maintained that the issue of nomination or sponsorship of a candidate for an election is completely an exclusive prerogative of the political party,” he held.
In related development, the Supreme Court affirmed the election of Dauda Lawal of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as Zamfara State Governor.
The apex court set aside the decision of the court of appeal declaring the governorship election in Zamafara State inconclusive.
The tribunal had dismissed the petition of the All Progressives Congress governorship candidate, Bello Matawalle, challenging the victory of Dauda Lawal of the PDP.
But at the appeal court, the court declared the election in the state inclusive and ordered a rerun in three local government areas which are Maradun, Birnin-Magaji, and Bukkuyum.
The court held that it was wrong for the Independent National Electoral Commission to adopt results from the IReV to declare the winner in the affected LGA, adding that “IReV is not part of the collation system but for viewing purposes.”
He held that the respondents did not provide substantial evidence to prove their allegations of over voting, among others.
Agim said, “The court of appeal decision is perverse, has no evidential foundation. Although the appeal has merit, it succeeds, and it is allowed.
“The order that the election is inclusive is hereby set aside. The election of the appellant is upheld.”
