What The Law Says About Newspaper Reports Of Election Results And Other Matters By O. G. Chukkol | Nairalaw

Not long after the commencement of the presidential and National
Assembly elections on the 23^rd day of February, 2019,
results were and are still been posted on diverse media platforms
including Facebook and WhatsApp by individuals.

Also, some of the reports are carried by newspapers in the
country. No doubt newspapers are very important to the citizens
because they rely on them to follow the happenings in the country
and of course it is most probable that the newspapers obtain the
results directly at the various polling units and collation
centres.

But there are fundamental questions that are begging for
answers, viz: are the results carried by these newspapers of any
value in the eyes of the law? Does the law regard contents of
newspapers as truth? In other words, if for instance Punch
Newspaper witnesses the collation of result at a polling unit and
publishes same for the masses but INEC thereafter releases a result
different from the one in the newspaper, can an aggrieved person
rely on the contents of the newspaper to prove that the result
released by INEC is inaccurate?

We have galaxy of decided cases on the evidential value of
newspaper reports. One of the oldest cases on the point is
RNHW v. SAMA (1991) 12 NWLR (Pt.171) 64 @ 77
 where it was held that “A newspaper report is not generally
admissible as evidence of the facts recorded in it.” The decision
was restated in Lawal v.Gov., Kwara State (2006) ALL FWLR
(Pt. 321) 1294 at 1308 (CA) and AGBAI & ANOR.
V. INEC & ORS. (2008) LPELR-3647(CA)

The position was also confirmed by the Supreme Court in
Ojukwu v. Yar’Adua (2009) ALL FWLR (Pt. 482) 1065.
There the petitioner/appellant, Ojukwu, sought to rely on newspaper
reports of alleged electoral malpractices in some parts of the
country to prove his election petition. That attempt failed with
this retort by Tobi, JSC in his lead judgment at p.1118 paragraph
G:

“What is the evidential value of a newspaper report? I do not
see any and there is none in law.”

The case of MRS. SUSAN OLAPEJU SINMISOLA OLLY V. HON.
OLUKOLU GANIYU TUNJI & ORS (2012) LPELR-7911(CA) at para
H is also a legal battle that followed the conduct of
primary elections at Lagos by the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN).
In order to prove her case as the winner of the primary election,
the Plaintiff tendered two newspapers (Vanguard and the Nation)
where it was published that she won the primary elections. Per
Ogunwumiju J.C.A., held thus:

“There is no doubt in my mind that this court cannot rely on
newspaper publications etc. which the 1st respondent relied on
among other evidence. It is a non-issue to consider photocopies of
newspaper publications as having any probative value since they
have no such value. Newspaper publications are only proof that the
publication was made and not proof of the truth of the contents of
the said publication.” (Underlined for emphasis)

In ABEGUNDE v. THE ONDO STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY &
ORS (2014) LPELR-23683(CA), the Plaintiff was a Honourable
member of the House of Representative elected on the platform of
the Labour Party but defected to ACN on the ground of division in
the party. He relied on newspaper publications to prove that there
were internal crisis in his previous party. The court held as
follows;

“Let me add that this position of the law that a newspaper
report is hearsay and so irrelevant and inadmissible in proof of
its contents is universal. See for instance pages 50 and 1356 of
Volume 1 of Sakar’s Law of Evidence in India, Pakistan etc. where
the learned author also has this to say, first at p.50: “A
newspaper report has no evidentiary value as it is inadmissible in
evidence. G. K. Bajpayee v. State of Utah Pradesh, AIR 2005 ALL 65
(71); 2005 CrI LJ 1985: 2005 (1) ALL WC 379.” And at p.1356:
“Newspaper report is inadmissible…. The newspaper report cannot be
the basis of filing petition, the statement of fact contained in
newspaper is merely hearsay and inadmissible in evidence.

See also BAJOWA v. FRN & ORS (2016)
LPELR-40229(CA) and the most recent case of
LAWRENCE v. OLUGBEMI & ORS (2018)
LPELR-45966(CA) where court rejected news paper report as
evidence that the Plaintiff was the duly elected flag bearer of All
Progressive Congress (APC).

The above authorities are substantially ad idem that contents of
newspaper reports are nothing but evidences that they were
published but not evidences that the contents are true. They are
deemed to be hearsay. So for the statement contained in a newspaper
to have any credibility, the maker of the statement subject of the
report in the Newspaper must be called to testify. Thus, when
tendered and admitted, it will be evidence that the publication was
made and therefore not proof of the truth of the statements
contained therein.

By and large, is only a result released by INEC that is
authentic and reliable.

There is also an implication of peddling false results in the
media which people appear to have ignored. Sharing fake election
results is a criminal offence with an attendant consequence. For
the avoidance of doubt, section 123(4) of the Electoral Act
provides thus:

“Any person who announces or publishes an election result
knowing same to  be false or which is at variance with the
signed certificate of return commits  and offence and on
conviction shall be liable to 36 months imprisonment.”

By way of concluding remark, the aim of this article is not to
discourage anyone from sharing election results. Rather it is meant
to suggest that the results shared in the media should be taken
with a pinch of salt and people should verify the results before
sharing as default in doing that may land one in jail.

1. G. Chukkol is a student Faculty of Law, ABU,
   Zaria. oliverchukkol@gmail.com^[1]
   08032470318