When A Returning Officer Says “Go To Court”, It Can Nullify The Election

 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS....

..

Question-1.:

According to Sections 65(b) and 138(1)(a) of the Electoral Act 2026, if a collation officer refuses to treat the disputes that were raised at his level of collation, and tells the party-agents that “all the disputes would all be treated together at the final level of collation”; but then, when all the disputes were gathered at the final collation level, the returning officer still would not treat the disputes which were accumulated before him, rather he told the party-agents to “GO TO COURT and file all your disputes inside your election petition”,......

Would that be enough grounds for the cancelling the election?

Answer.:

Yes, this scenario describes clear non-compliance with collation procedures under the Electoral Act 2026.

Sections 62 and related provisions require collation officers and returning officers to address and resolve disputes/complaints raised by party agents at their level using polling unit data, accreditation records, and transmitted results — and not defer everything or dismiss them outright.

Telling agents to “Go To Court” without proper handling of the disputes that were raised violates the rules of the Electoral Act.

This can be a ground for an election petition under Section 138(1), which includes non-compliance. If the non-compliance is proven to be substantial, the court may nullify the election and order a fresh one.

Evidence which include witnesses, videos, and forms would be needed to prove this non-compliance in the court.

..

..

Question-2.:

If a returning officer refuses to settle the disputes that were raised by the party agents and tell them to “Go To Court”, then it means that the whole of the election is already flawed, since the breach by the returning officer affected the whole of the results of that election which he poorly handled (being that the returning officer is the final collation officer in that particular election).

Answer.:

Yes, that is true.

Refusing to resolve party agents' disputes at the collation/returning officer level breaches the Act's procedures as stated in Section 65(b).

This amounts to non-compliance under Section 138(1)(a); and thus, the returning officer saying “Go To Court” without resolving the disputes that were raised is actually a substantial ground to petition the election tribunal for the invalidation of the election.

If it substantially proven at the tribunal (with enough evidence) that those raised disputes (which were not treated by the returning officer affected) the overall results, then the election would be cancelled, and an order for a fresh election would be given by the tribunal.