The Court of Appeal has offered reasons why it sacked Abba Yusuf as the governor of Kano State.
The court on Friday declared the All Progressives Congress candidate, Nasiru Gawuna, as winner of the poll.
The Court of Appeal, sitting in Abuja, thereby affirmed the judgement of the Kano State Elections Petitions Tribunal, which declared Gawuna winner of the governorship election.
The Tribunal, led by Justice Oluyemi Osadebay, had nullified the election of Yusuf, the candidate of the New Nigeria Peoples Party, with the declaration that 165,663 of his votes were invalid.
The Independent National Electronic Electoral Commission had announced Yusuf as the winner of the March 18, 2023 election, saying he garnered 1,019,602 votes to defeat Gawuna who got 890,705 of the votes cast.
But the APC approached the Tribunal, citing alleged electoral malpractice.
The Tribunal, agreeing with the APC, nullified Yusuf’s election, adding that over 160,000 ballot papers “were not signed or stamped by INEC”.
Yusuf’s votes were subsequently reduced to 853,939, while Ganuwa’s 890,705 votes were not affected.
The three-man panel of the Tribunal thus sacked Yusuf on September 20, 2023, after deducting 165,663 of his votes.
The former governor then filed an appeal before the appellate court.
In a unanimous judgement on Friday, a three-member panel of the appellate court dismissed the appeal by Yusuf challenging the ruling of the Kano State Elections Petitions Tribunal.
Delivering the judgement, Justice Moore Adumein held that Yusuf was not qualified to stand for the election in the first place.
The court held that Yusuf did not put up any resistance against the allegation that he was not a member of the NNPP.
Adumein asked: “If you claim you are a member of a party, is it not logical to say so yourself rather than by proxy?”
He held that Section 134 of the Electoral Act allowed the court to entertain an averment on the qualification of a candidate in an election.
The appellate court held that the court cannot allow political parties to act arbitrarily.
Justice Adumein held: “The Constitution is supreme and binding on all persons, including political parties.
“Political parties cannot be permitted to circumvent the clear and mandatory provision of the constitution.
“To contest an election, you must not only be a member of a party, but sponsored by that party.
“The Electoral Act made it mandatory that a party must keep a register of its members and make it available to INEC before an election.
“Yusuf was not a member of his party by the time he was purportedly sponsored by his party.
“He was not qualified to contest for the election.
“A court must be consistent with its judgement.”
Adumein noted that the Tribunal was wrong not to have disqualified Yusuf in its ruling.
The court held: “The Tribunal was wrong not to have disqualified him.
“The failure to comply with section 177(c) is fatal to their election.
“Where a party carelessly nominates a candidate, such is nullity irrespective of whether he performs well.
“Sponsorship without membership is like putting nothing on something.
“It cannot stand.
“This is a clear example of acting with brazen impunity as if the Constitution is not binding.”
Justice Adumein berated political parties for always blaming their defeat on the court and judges.
He said: “The same party will wake up to accuse the judiciary, including infamous allegations of corrupt practices.”
