By Charles Azubuike Obodozie
Abstract
The purpose of an electoral petition is to obtain the correct expression of the intent of the voters. But a petitioner in an election petition has the burden to proveany alleged non-compliance, and that such non-compliance substantially affected the result of the election. This burden is herculean, as decided cases have shown. Electoral
jurisprudence is often founded on the presumption of regularity of election results as declared by the electoral umpire, which implies that the law takes for granted that a credible election has been conducted. This presumption has made challenging the outcome of an election through the legal process, unfair. The consequence of this protection is that legal justice has scarcely redressed electoral injustice. The aim of this
paper is to examine the present position in Nigeria and to suggest reforms. The paper adopted the doctrinal approach. Relevant legislations, local and foreign case law were explored for an understanding of the subject. The findings from the study revealed among other things, that the adherence to the present burden of proof and the
substantiality rule, appears to have made the tribunals shut their eyes to injustice and to the general will of the electorate. It recommends reforms that would enhance electoral justice by using video evidence to prove the signing of election results by party agents, and the automatic electronic transmission of results. The paper concludes that there is a need to review of the presumption of regularity and the substantiality rule so that non-
compliance can affect electoral outcomes.