Developments in elections petitions tribunals in some parts of the country underscore the need for credible electoral process, Editor, Politics/Features, EMEKA ALEX DURU, writes.
Few weeks before the March/April general elections, the former National Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Attahiru Jega, had assured of a credible exercise that would meet international standards. Certain developments after the election appeared to have fallen in line with the declaration.
The concession of defeat by the then President Goodluck Jonathan of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to his main rival, Muhammadu Buhari of All Progressives congress (APC), even before the announcement of the official results, easily gave out the contest as one of the best that the country had had since her attainment of independence in 1960.
With the feat which, for the first time, saw an opposition political party dislodging a ruling party, Jega and members of his commission walked shoulder high in celebrating work well done. Analysts had also, in the euphoria of the unusual development, almost concluded that the nation’s search for a credible electoral process had been met.
But barely seven months after the conclusion of the elections, it has become apparent that Nigeria may still look further in the search for an electoral culture that can meet standard practice. This sudden reality comes against the backdrop of verdicts at national and state elections petitions tribunals in various parts of the country. While the judgments tumble in, they come with excitements in some instances, and shocks in others. While the victorious parties hail the pronouncements from the tribunals, losers scream blue murder.
Rivers, Akwa Ibom on the spot
Rivers and Akwa Ibom states top the list in areas where tribunal judgments recorded pronounced upsets.
Monday, October 26, Rivers State legislative election petition tribunals sitting in Abuja nullified the election of 20 out of the 32 members of the House of Assembly.
The four tribunals, in separate judgments, upheld the petitions by candidates of the APC in the election and ordered rerun in the affected constituencies.
The nullification of the 20 lawmakers’ election came about 48 hours after the Rivers State Governorship Election Tribunal also annulled the election of Governor Nyesom Wike of the PDP and ordered a rerun. In arriving at its judgment, the tribunal held that the April 11, 2015 governorship election that produced Wike was not conducted in substantial compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act.
It further said it agreed with the governorship candidate of APC, Dakuku Peterside, and his party that the election was characterised by intimidation, harassment, snatching of ballot boxes, diversion of electoral materials, ballot stuffing and allocation of figures in favour of the PDP candidate.
It further held that the failure to use the card-reader as instructed by the INEC robbed the election of its credibility and made the outcome a sham and a mockery of democracy.
Besides, the tribunal held that the petitioners had, through their witnesses, established allegations of non-compliance with the Electoral Act, and that the petitioners adduced credible evidence backed by documents to prove that Governor Wike was wrongly declared winner of the election.
Earlier, the election tribunal for Akwa Ibom had invalidated the election results in 18 out of 31 local government areas in the state. As in Rivers, the tribunal had cited violence, intimidation and non-compliance with provisions of the Electoral Act in the conduct of the election as reasons for annulling poll results of the affected councils.
The tribunals, incidentally, did not order the governors to vacate their offices. However, Wike and his Akwa Ibom counterpart, Udom Emmanuel – both, incidentally of the PDP, have signalled their intentions to appeal the judgments.
PDP cries blue murder
The PDP is understandably not amused at the development. In an emotional outburst by the party’s leadership, it alleged the existence of unseen hands of the presidency and APC in its setback, vowing to resist further efforts at decimating the number of states under its column.
In a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Olisa Metuh, PDP alleged that Rivers governorship election tribunal showed clear bias against Wike and the PDP, describing it as completely bizarre, unacceptable and part of the script by the APC to manipulate the will of the people.
He cited relocation of the election petitions tribunals from their states to Abuja, constant juggling of judicial officers and members of governorship elections tribunals in PDP states, especially, Rivers and Akwa Ibom, harassment of judicial and electoral officers involved in the governorship election cases in these state, using agencies of government, particularly the Directorate of State Services (DSS), as instances of official intimidation that made the party lose the two states.
Metuh also alleged constant threats, intimidation and coercing of witnesses against the PDP in the tribunals.
“The bias in the judgment against the PDP in Rivers as well as Akwa Ibom is evidenced in the contradictions inherent in the trial process of the two cases and the verdicts therein, whereby the tribunals clearly disregarded standing legal norm that a petitioner must establish prove of claims.
“Also curious is the fact that after both the petitioner and respondent agreed before the tribunal that both card-reader and manual accreditations were used for the election, the tribunal still went ahead to base its decision on issues of card-reader,” PDP noted.
The party was angry that while it was convenient for the tribunals to use legal technicalities to deny PDP victory in Imo, Lagos, Ogun and Yobe states, the same rules were misapplied to favour APC petitioners in Rivers and Akwa Ibom. “How can one explain the fact that while governorship elections are being upturned in PDP states, in APC states, where similar claims and facts are in contention, elections are being upheld?” Metuh asked.
He called on all Nigerians and the international community to note what he described as the growing manipulation of the judiciary by the APC government, warning that the trend portends great danger to Nigeria’s democracy and the stability of the country.
APC has however washed its hands of the outcome of the various tribunals, insisting that the verdicts are rather vindication of its earlier allegation of manipulation of the electoral process in the affected states by the PDP.
APGA also cries foul
Curiously, while PDP claims being robbed of victory by APC through the tribunals in Rivers and Akwa Ibom, it is also being accused of same underhand action by the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) in Abia and Anambra states, where the election of many of its candidates in the last election had been upheld by the tribunals.
APGA members in Anambra are hardly convinced on the rulings of the tribunals affirming the declaration of PDP members as winners of the National Assembly election in a state that the former ruling party has three factions.
Chieftains of the party in Abia are more vehement in accusing the judiciary of being compromised by the PDP. For instance, in a full page advertorial in The Nation newspaper of Friday, October 16, 2015, the party had alleged that, “Huge sums of money in form of gratification have exchanged hands between the PDP leadership in the state and cronies of the justices. Consequently, some of the judges have been responding in line with the dictates of the lucre as evidenced in the current dismissing of all petitions filed by our party against the PDP candidates. The bribe funds, we understood, were delivered to the judges outside the country and through proxies in order to leave no traces.”
The party called for the trial, jailing and execution of the jurists found to have compromised their offices in the tribunals.
On Sunday, October 18, in another full-page advertorial published on page 10 of The Nation, APGA also alleged that “suspicious but serious moves involving the officials of the Abia State Government have been made across the borders of Nigeria to seek a possible and highly secretive way of compromising the judges either in cash or through the purchase of very expensive property.”
Chairman of APGA in Abia, Rev. Augustine Ehiemere, who signed the advertorials, was later said to have denied authorising them. But even then, peaceful protest by youths suspected to be supporters of the party, against the increasing turn-out of the verdicts of the tribunal in favour of PDP, indicated the level of the discomfort by APGA at the turn of events.
Nigerians react
Zik Obi, a lawyer, while agreeing that any aggrieved aspirant for an office has legal right to seek redress if he is dissatisfied with the outcome of the election, argues however that whether the tribunals’ verdicts are acceptable to the parties or not is another issue.
He stressed that it would be wrong to give the impression or make a conclusion that the election petitions tribunals’ judgments were rubbishing election results produced by INEC.
According to Obi, the law provides that after every election, if any candidate is aggrieved, they can take a step to seek redress.
“The tribunal, after its examination, can then nullify the election or ask for a re-run depending on the issue.
“But whether the tribunal’s judgment is correct is another kettle of tea. In some cases, it is contradictory. For instance, in the case of Akinwunmi Ambode and Jimi Agbaje in Lagos card-reader was used, but in the case of Rivers, it was ignored. So they can seek redress in the appeal court or in the case of governorship, they can go to the Supreme Court if dissatisfied with the tribunal’s verdict.
“Human beings are different and sometimes are bound to make errors, but I would not say the judgments so far have rubbished the results given by INEC. With time, the electoral process will be deepened.”
Constitutional lawyer and activist, Tunji Abayomi, agrees with Obi. In an interview with TheNiche, he insisted that the tribunals are following the position of the law on election.
Abayomi observed that some elections are cancelled when they are substantially not in compliance with the law, arguing that it would be wrong for anybody to blame INEC alone.
He said that it has been proven in most cases that elections are manipulated more by the government in power, but that it is left for the aggrieved candidates to seek justice through the election tribunal.
According to Abayomi, “there are situations where even the people come to a conclusion that the candidate that won the election was deprived of victory. So, the only way available is for the tribunal to look into the case and pass judgment. The law expects a re-run where there is established anomaly.
“What is happening is constitutional. And I do not think that the judgments so far by the tribunals have rubbished or messed up the election results of INEC. We should give greater attention to propriety.”
Credible electoral process to the rescue
Analysts attribute the confusion in the country’s election culture to the absence of credible electoral process.
The nearest the nation’s authorities came in appreciating the magnitude of harm the issue had wrought on the system was in 2007 general election following the admission by the late President Umaru Yar’Adua that his election was a product of a flawed process.
Though Yar’Adua still went to court to defend his mandate against his main challenger, Buhari (currently president) of the then All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP), he hinted on the readiness of his administration to tackle the problems that had worked against the attainment of genuine democracy in the land.
Among the areas that he spoke of was the institution of electoral reforms that would consolidate the nation’s democracy. The aim, he said, was to reduce or eliminate controversies that usually attend the country’s elections.
Yar’Adua’s declaration came with measured excitement. On one hand, there was the euphoria that a solution was about to be found on a menace that appeared to have prevented the country from attaining credible electoral process.
This euphoria notwithstanding, the speech was received with a great deal of scepticism by a large section of Nigerians whose huge investments in enthroning a democratic order in the nation had over the years appeared to have been largely misplaced.
Their doubts were essentially centred on two fronts. Previous administrations had made similar pledges that were hardly fulfilled. Besides, Yar’Adua, who announced the reform agenda, had his election seriously contested on accounts of alleged irregularities arising from the April 21, 2007 presidential polls. Thus, his critics had many grounds to doubt his sincerity in actualising the agenda.
The late president however embarked on bold steps that suggested his readiness to place Nigeria on a new pedestal, few months into office.
On Wednesday, August 22, 2007, he announced a 22-member Electoral Reform Panel that would set a roadmap towards re-engineering the country’s electoral process. The panel was headed by former Chief Justice of the Federation, Mohammed Lawal Uwais.
The body, on inauguration, was charged “to undertake a review of Nigeria’s history with general elections and identify factors which affect the quality and credibility of the elections and their impact on the democratic process; examine relevant provisions of the constitution, the Electoral Act, and other legislation that have bearing on the electoral process and assess their impact on the quality and credibility of general elections”.
He further directed the panel to aim towards an electoral process that would ensure “the conduct of elections to meet acceptable international standards”. This, he noted, would include a mechanism to reduce post-election tensions.
Mission derailed
Yar’Adua’s death significantly impacted on the report of the panel, as it was not faithfully implemented. The succeeding Jonathan administration barely succeeded in making extrapolations of the recommendations to meet the political exigencies of the day. For example, in such instance as the appointment of INEC chairman, where Jonathan picked Jega, a member of the Uwais panel, in apparent hope that he would bring to bear the recommendation of the body in effecting electoral reform, experts were quick to note that Jega’s recruitment directly by him as against being recommended by the Nigerian Judicial Council (NJC) robbed the office of the needed independence. Buhari, incidentally, has toed the same line in appointment of Professor Mahmood Yakubu.
Patrick Nwabunnia, political scientist and public opinion analyst, blames the prevailing inadequacies in the electoral process on the unfaithful implementation of the Uwais Panel Report.
“Until we sit down and agree on what we want and fashion out ways of attaining same, we would continue to run round the circle and our electoral process will continue to remain at latency stage,” he told TheNiche.