Paragraph 53
Non-compliance with rules, etc.(1) Noncompliance with any of the provisions of this Schedule, or with a rule of practice for the time being operative, except otherwise stated or implied, shall not render any proceeding void, unless the Tribunal or Court so directs, but the proceeding may be set aside wholly or in part as irregular, or amended, or otherwise dealt with in such manner and on such terms as the Tribunal or Court may deem fit and just.
(2) An application to set aside an election petition or a proceeding resulting there from for irregularity or for being a nullity, shall not be allowed unless made within a reasonable time and when the party making the application has not taken any fresh step in the proceedings after knowledge of the defect.
(3) An application to set aside an election petition or a proceeding pertaining thereto shall show clearly the legal grounds on which the application is based.
(4) An election petition shall not be defeated by an objection as to form if it is possible at the time the objection is raised to remedy the defect either by way of amendment or as may be directed by the Tribunal or Court.
(5) An objection challenging the regularity or competence of an election petition shall be heard and determined after the close of pleadings.
i. This paragraph seeks to avoid technicalities in the application of the provisions of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2022 as it relates to breach of the Rules by any of the parties to an election Petition.
ii. The paragraph empowers the Tribunal or Court to determine the extent and nature of non-compliance with the provisions of the First Schedule that can render the proceedings of an election Petition void. The paragraph also empowers the Tribunal or Court to treat non-compliance with the provisions of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act as a mere irregularity which should not render the proceedings void unless the Tribunal otherwise thinks or directs.
iii.
Note that application to set aside proceedings on the ground of irregularity must be made
within reasonable time and the party must not have taken any fresh step. A fresh step is
deemed
to have been taken where for instance a Party complaining that Motion was not filed within
the
prescribed time, files a Counter Affidavit in response to the said Motion.
Read Dahiru v Kigbu & Ors (2019) LPELR-48787 (CA)
AISHATU DAHIRU & ANOR. V. INEC & 2 ORS. (PETITION NO: EPT/AD/GOV/1/2023) @ page 24 - 25
By the provisions of paragraph 53(5) of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2022, a Respondent who has any
objection to the hearing of a Petition as to its validity or competence shall raise the issue of its validity or
competence in his reply. Paragraph 12(5) of the Electoral Act, 2022, provides that any Respondent who has objection as
to the hearing of the Petition shall file his reply and state the objection.
By the combined readings of paragraphs 53(5), 12(5) of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2022, and Section 285(8) of the Constitution of Federal Republic, 1999, as amended, any objection challenging the irregularity or competence of the Tribunal or any Preliminary Objection or any interlocutory issue relating to the jurisdiction of the court, the ruling on such an application shall be delivered by the court at the stage of final Judgment by the Tribunal.
The Tribunal cited BELGORE V. AHMED (2013)8 NWLR (Pt 1355) 60 at 91-92
