The Abuja Division of the Appeal Court confirmed Governor Bala Mohammed’s triumph in the Bauchi State governorship election held on March 18.
The appeal had been lodged by Sadique Abubakar, the governorship candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC), after the tribunal’s decision to uphold Mohammed’s win.
The three-member panel of justices reached a unanimous decision, refraining from awarding any costs, and ruled that each party involved in the case should bear their respective expenses.
The presiding justice delivered the judgment following the sequence of the appellant’s arguments before the appeal court.
Regarding the first plea, the appellant requested the nullification of the election, citing improper completion of forms and booklets used in the election. The court concluded that the appellant did not substantiate this claim with the required evidence.
The court also determined that the appellant failed to identify the specific polling units implicated in the alleged irregularities and was unable to specify the deficiencies in the forms. Additionally, it ruled that the appellant did not establish how the improperly filled forms influenced the election results.
The court noted that the witnesses presented by the appellant lacked a clear understanding of the forms’ content and commended the tribunal for diligently examining the evidence before it.
Regarding the claim of widespread non-compliance with electoral laws, the court found that the appellant once again could not substantiate this, as some witnesses who testified either did not participate in the election or based their statements solely on observations within their respective polling units.
Concerning the alleged unprofessional conduct of INEC officials, the court echoed the tribunal’s stance, emphasizing that it was not part of the appellant’s initial plea in the lower court and therefore could not be entertained.
The ruling favored the first respondent, Mohammed.
Regarding the claim of fraudulent cancellations, mutilations, and alterations favoring the PDP candidate, the appeal court acknowledged that if substantiated, falsifying results constitutes a criminal offense warranting the annulment of election outcomes.
However, the court emphasized that the appellant bore the responsibility of providing evidence and needed to present the authentic results if arguing that the ones tendered by INEC were falsified.
The court observed that regrettably, the appellant failed to substantiate this claim. Additionally, the court emphasized that, at the very least, the appellant should have provided an authentic result alongside the allegedly falsified one.