The level of optimism displayed so far about the elections taking place on February 25th, indicates eloquently that millions of Nigerians are determined to vote for the real change they’ve been yearning for all these years.
Never have they been this ready to elect leaders who they expect will be honest about salvaging what is left of Nigeria. And so, armed with their PVCs- for those who have been able to collect theirs, the masses are hoping that the elections will be credible especially with the introduction of the BVAS and electronic transmission of election results.
One nagging problem however is the role of the judiciary and the nature of judgements delivered in recent times on election matters, which have become grave threat to Nigeria’s democracy. Many Nigerians have been expressing dissatisfaction on the Supreme Court judgements in favour of Sen. Godswill Akpabio and Senate President, Ahmad Lawan.
Recall that Federal High Court and the Court of Appeal earlier upheld the duo of Machina and Ekpoudom’s elections as the validly nominated flagbearers of the APC for the senatorial district polls in Yobe and Akwa-Ibom states, respectively. But, the Supreme Court upturned the decisions of the two lower courts and held that they were wrong to have assumed jurisdiction in the suit since the issue of candidate nomination lies with political parties. It subsequently dismissed Udom Ekpoudom, and Bashir Machina, as authentic candidates of the All Progressives Congress, APC, for Akwa-Ibom North-West Senatorial District, and Yobe North Senatorial District.
This is not the first time the Supreme Court is pronouncing such controversial judgements.
Concerning the recent controversial judgements, many people do not believe justice has been done, a situation former Akwa Ibom Resident Electoral Commissioner for the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, Mike Igini, described as ‘tragedy’.”It’s a tragedy in our country that 16 days to elections we are still talking about party primaries issues that ought to have been dealt with months ago. The judiciary which should be the last line of defence of democracy and the rule of law historically, has not lived up to expectation,” he said.
Going down history lane, Igini, who featured on an Arise TV show during the week, recounted the several errors made by the judiciary in election matters. For instance, “the June 12 crisis, look at how judiciary itself was used to truncat it. In a letter signed for the annulment of June 12 in 1993, the military government of the day declared that they had to annul the June 12 election to avert judicial anarchy.
“In 2007, the presidential ballot papers were not serialised, the matter went to court and eventually the election was declared valid. It took a President Yar’Adua of blessed memory to acknowledge that the election was flawed. Recall I wrote that 2007 election without the ballot paper being serialised should be annulled. But it took a vote of just one justice of Supreme Court to affirm such a process that represents the lowest level of democratic discredit.”
According to Igini, the 2022 Electoral Act is intended to bring about profound reforms about political party primaries so as to have outcome that would reflect the wishes and aspiration of party members, regretting however, that “All that have happened today by this judgement is effort to kill that section – laws relating to internal party democracy. This judgement has put what we call the final rite; it is an interment of the death of those provisions.
“If a process is not understood, abuse is inevitable. The 2022 electoral act was designed to bring sanity to political parties’ choice of candidates.”
Continuing he lamented, “What has happened is a tragedy. For us, for our democracy to blossom, to be nourished, it must be noted, the first assault to democracy is rule of law. The judiciary that was very audacious, courageous, fearless under the military, I’m not seeing that happening now.”
On the two cases being hinged on domestic affairs the lawyer said, “Domestic affairs do not mean that party leaders should not respect, abide by their own internal rules, particularly when it has been decided that in view of what we are going through with political party primaries, that those domestic regulations should not even be elevated to the 2022 Electoral Act”, maintaining that “The current judgement was not decided on merits.”
He further faulted the Supreme Court judgements, saying that a pre-election case does not require oral evidence in terms of calling of witnesses. Buttressing his point, he referenced Section 137 of the Electoral Act. “We have decided that because of the shenanigans of parties in election, we no longer need to call oral evidence on election matters because we knew what they’ve been doing over the years which is, when we call for oral evidence, some people will say they’ll call 350 witnesses just to frustrate that case.”
Raising concerns on the forthcoming elections in relation to the role of the judiciary, Igini said, “If we are doing this with the Electoral Act, where lies the fate of all matters that will come before the judiciary?”
“I’m worried and I’ve said it over time even before the judgement, that Nigeria will die because of lack of commitments of all the members of the bar and bench to the survival of our democracy.
“We need a fearless judiciary that will stand tall and mighty in defence of democracy and the rule of law.
“Two kinds of corruption must be avoided; the corruption of judicial officer, and the corruption in the institution of the judiciary by way of the people trying to intimidate the judiciary, pressure the judiciary and do all kinds of things.
“Our quest for a fearless and courageous and independent judiciary, will be meaningless and hopeless if we do not also protect very courageous judges that will stand tall and call justice by their own names,” he stated.
Still on the forthcoming elections, he expressed worries about what he termed “the expanding empire of the courts in political matters”, noting that elections are to be won at the polls which is “what we are trying to do with the Commission, the BVAS; with all the innovations that have been developed to address historical challenges.”
That’s not all, regarding the situation on ground, Mr Igini is even more worried and disturbed because of corruption in that arm of government.
”Even INEC lawyers represent senior advocates who are also the ones who will go to court to undermine INEC. Democracy will not have future if we don’t have a judiciary to stand tall and mighty,” he stated.
