The Kwara state Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) governorship candidate in April 2011 general election, Mohammed Dele Belgore, has filed an appeal   at the Supreme Court against the declaration of Governor Abdulfatah Ahmed as governor of the state by Court of Appeal sitting in Ilorin.

Belgore has filed an 18-ground appeal challenging the ruling of the Court of Appeal on January 7  which upheld the ruling of the Election Petitions  Tribunal which dismissed his petition against the election of  Abdulfattah Ahmed as governor of the state.

The ACN said in its notice of appeal, filed on Monday, January 16, that the Appeal Court failed to make pronouncements on several issues of law raised in the case of the petitioners - ACN, Belgore, and his running mate, Engineer Adeyinka.

These issues of law, the ACN contended, included whether or not the statutory documents (the EC8 series) taken from INEC and tendered by the petitioners were duly certified and are admissible in law.  The party insisted that the court refused to answer the question of admissibility, in spite of its contention that by labeling the documents inadmissible the tribunal had prejudiced its mind and could not be said to have attached proper probative value to them.

The party also contended that the Court of Appeal, in spite of its power to do so, refused to make its own findings of fact on the documents concerning allegations of over-voting, inflation of results, non-accreditation and wrong entries but merely adopted the disputed findings of the lower tribunal.

The ACN said rather than adopt the consistent rulings of the Supreme Court, including in Nwakwo V Yar'Adua, that any party that complains of vague pleadings has a duty to ask for further particulars or he would be stopped from complaining, the Appeal Court adopted its overridden decision in Saraki V Olawepo.

The party also said that the appellate court erred in not attaching any weight to the discrepancy of 21,192 between the votes recorded on Form EC8As and number of ballot papers actually used in the areas being challenged.

It added: "The contention of the Appellants was that there was an excess of 21,192 ballot papers recorded as having been used in the Forms EC8As tendered in evidence over and above the actual number of ballot papers used upon a physical count of the said ballot papers.

"The evidence disclosed the polling units, wards and Local governments affected by the discrepancy and the evidence shows that the discrepancy is spread across the areas being challenged by the Petitioners. The evidence is undisputed. By reason of the above, the Appellants had given all the particulars necessary to establish the acts of non-compliance in question and how it affected their case.

"In the circumstances, the court ought to have acted on that evidence to hold that the integrity of the election in the affected areas had been severely impugned."