Court considered the appeal on whether the
trial judge had erred in rejecting evidence of
the appellants/ petitioners pinning an agent of
the 1 st respondent who had engaged in voter
Court scrutinised the evidence and disagreed
with the trial judge to hold that the person
accused of engaging in voter bribery was no
agent to the 1 st respondent. Court held that
the evidence adduced by way of data print
outs from a telecommunications company
proved that the agent had sent bribes in the
form of mobile money to convince voters to
vote for the first respondent.
Court accordingly nullified the elections of
the respondents and ordered fresh elections.