Recently, a former head-of state and president at two different times in our contemporary political history made public statements in the media about why the courts should not be the decider in electoral matters, especially in elections. He labelled verdicts that come from courts on such matters as “Cathedral judgements.” And also, so many people make such claims lately, as if this trend is entirely new and strange to our polity. In our country today, where the majority of people suffer from “collective amnesia”, it is imperative to examine whether the courts of law have overreached themselves as arbiters in election matters, by probing whether the trend is a new phenomenon in our electoral-judicial issues.
For millennials who may not be enthusiastic about Nigeria’s political history, it is easy to conclude erroneously that this trend is a new introduction to our politics in the last two decades. From available empirical realities, that is certainly not the situation. Taking a look back at the beginning of the Second Republic in 1979, our political transition programme, interestingly brokered by the same former president who made the claim in his capacity as military head of state then, with the presidential election, ended up in the courts. It was the Supreme Court that affirmed the victory of late Alhaji Shehu Shagari as the duly elected president.
|
|
I still recall vividly how, as a secondary school student, I sat with my late father glued to the television on NTA Ibadan, listening to the presidential results as it was being announced by the then famous TV broadcaster, Mr Bankole Laotan, after they had been certified by the then National Electoral Commission led by the late Chief Michael Ani in 1979. The three main challengers were Alhaji Shehu Shagari of the National Party of Nigeria (NPN), Chief Obafemi Awolowo of the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) and Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe of the Nigeria People’s Party (NPP). There was also Alhaji Aminu Waziri of the Great Nigeria Peoples party (GNPP) and Alhaji Aminu Kano of the Peoples Redemption Party (PRP).
Even as young boys, we knew that it was the NPN that had a kind of national spread over the other parties, even though the three main parties had total control and eventually won in their regional bases. When the late sage Chief Obafemi Awolowo went to court, I was curious, as we saw then that his party didn’t have votes that were close enough to those of the winner, and he equally did not get the required twenty-five per cent of votes in two-thirds of the states, which was meant to be thirteen out of the then nineteen states of the federation. But he went to court because the winner of the election in itself didn’t equally secure two-thirds of the votes in the thirteen states as well; he made it in twelve states, and equally because there was a clause in the constitution that recommended the convening of an electoral college if such a circumstance occurred. Instead, President Shagari secured two-thirds in twelve states and a sizeable number of votes in the thirteenth state. The late legal guru, Chief Richard Akinjide successfully canvassed in the court that those votes were two-thirds of the constitutionally required twenty five per cent of that thirteenth state, which qualified to be accepted as such. His argument was upheld at the Supreme Court and President Shagari’s victory was affirmed.
|
|
|
|---|
I still have fond memories of how Chief Akinjide started being referred to as “Mr twelve two-thirds” after that legal tussle in 1979. Before the collapse of that republic on 31st December 1983, the presidential election of that year, even with a new National electoral commission chairman in the late Justice Ovie Whiskey, equally ended in the courts, as well as the governorship elections in the old Ondo, Oyo and Bendel states, with that of Ondo State being the most often referred to, due to the violence that resulted after the declaration of late Chief Omoboriowo as winner, before it was subsequently reversed in favour of the then Governor Adekunle Ajasin, from the tribunal headed by the late legal luminary, erudite judge of repute, and the first Nigerian Director of Law School, late Dr Justice Olakunle Orojo (CFR), to the Supreme court. The transition of the President Ibrahim Babangida years didn’t see the light of day except the ones for the National Assembly, before being finally tainted with the annulment on the 23rd of June 1993 of the widely acclaimed, freest and fairest presidential election we have ever had in this country on 12 June, 1993. So, electoral litigations were not that prominent during that period.
Fast forward to the 1999 presidential election, which equally ended up at the Supreme Court, where Chief Olu Falae of the ANPP/AD alliance had gone to challenge the victory of Chief Obasanjo of the PDP at a time. Late President Muhammadu Buhari contested the 2003 presidential election as the candidate of the ANPP, and also in 2007 as the candidate of the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) in 2011, and lost all the elections until 2015, when he won as the candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC). Suffice it to say that President Buhari, at each of those elections, had gone to the court up to the Supreme Court, in protest of the results of the election. It was his constitutional right.
At elections conducted under the watch of President Obasanjo in 2007, the gubernatorial results in Ondo, Edo and Osun states were decided by the courts, after petitions against these results were filed at the tribunals. It is interesting to note that the results were upturned in favour of the petitioners, one by one. Just like the court saw merit in Governor Hope Uzodinma’s petition and got his victory affirmed during his first term in office, Messrs Peter Obi and Rotimi Amaechi had, at one time or the other, been beneficiaries of judicial interventions in the gubernatorial elections in their respective states and became governors. How convenient is it to forget these so soon?
Stay Ahead with Premium Times
Follow us on Google News and never miss breaking stories, investigations, and in-depth reporting.
Add as a preferred source on Google
It is imperative to have free and fair elections in our democratic dispensation, but to me a most vital ingredient of democracy is strategically missing in Nigeria, as of today. And it is the act of sportsmanship. Politicians here find it so difficult to concede defeat, even where it is very apparent that they have lost in an election. From Ani to Whiskey to Eme Awa to Nwosu to Okon Uya to Dagogo-Jack to Akpata to Guobadia to Maurice Iwu to Jega to Mohamed Yakubu and now to Amupitan, Nigerians have always condemned electoral umpire chairmen after every election. From ECN to FEDECO to NEC to NECON and now to INEC, it has always been the same song when politicians lose elections. The electoral umpire is “compromised.”
This is where Dr Goodluck Jonathan (GCFR) comes in. He is the symbol of electoral sportsmanship as at today by conceding the 2015 presidential election, even when his party members wanted him to do otherwise. Today, President Jonathan is a hero and revered for that matter globally. That action by the then Minister Orubebe at the results collation centre in 2015 in Abuja is still fresh in our memories. But I also recall, though, that the late Chief Adefarati, who was then governor of Ondo State in 2003, also refused to take the winner, late Dr Segun Agagu, to court after the result declaration, in an election whose credibility was vigorously debated. He conceded defeat and went quietly to his village to rest. The season is here again. The campaigns have been flagged off and the elections are fast approaching, but unfortunately there seems to be no lessons learnt on the need for sportsmanship in an electoral contest.
I am not playing down the need for credible, free and fair elections, but suffice to say that even in circumstances where the elections are free and fair, are the losers ready to concede? Is it not laughable to hear the first runner-up in the last Osun State gubernatorial elections saying he is studying the results in an election with a sixty thousand-plus-vote margin, and in which the leader of his party, the president, has congratulated the winner? This is exactly my fear for democracy in Nigeria.
The legal practitioners in Nigeria have a role to play here. Though it is the constitutional right of losers to seek redress in courts, yet not all briefs are worth the paper on which the petitions are written, if not for the financial gains involved. But critics of this position will say “lawyers must eat though.” The Nigerian fault lines are so potent and germane to an extent that it serves as the step-boards to ignite crisis, or, succinctly put, they are the keys to the ignition of political crisis in Nigeria. The question of tribe, religion and ethnicity are easy tools in the hands of mischievous political players and can therefore be used in the propagation of false narratives to create problems.
This is why the issue is not whether the courts have been interfering in our political process; that is their constitutional role, and equally the rightful place for petitioners to seek redress, and they have been playing it since the beginning of our democratic dispensation, even with all the insults attached to it. The issue therefore is for our politicians too to know that political contests are like games, sporting events, so there will always be winners and losers. It is not going to be totally strange if this situation persists in 2027 after the presidential elections, as the actions and the utterances of the presidential candidates do not suggest otherwise despite signing a peace treaty, and this is where all patriotic citizens who wish Nigeria well must come in to make sure the country is not set ablaze after the elections.
Lots of things are happening in the country at the moment that call for sober reflection. Suffice to say it is across all strata of human endeavour. Social, economic, political, and religious levels across the board, but right in the midst of this situation, opportunities abound for the discerning and the intuitively positive minds. The ones who identify that every bad situation can be turned right. The ones who see problems and provide solutions to the problems, an economically productive solution for that matter. Examples abound of young people creating wealth and business empires from problems in the country. Positive minds in the telecoms industry, information technology industry, academics, sports, and, of course, entertainment. Young Nigerians in the music and Nollywood industries in Nigeria have put the country on the positive side of international recognition in the last decade. They have been good and patriotic ambassadors of the country all over the world. A pride to Nigeria and always looking into the future positively.
The duty of our politicians is to help them achieve this lofty goal by encouraging them with their actions and conduct, and not frightening them with gory tales of our beloved country. Especially those tales of our forgotten past. Patriotism and positivity go hand in hand in this regard. Our citizens must be encouraged to be patriotic and always love their country. They must be reassured that there is hope for them in their country. The hope must not only be assured, but it must also be seen in practical terms. No one will benefit anything from a war-torn country; examples are bound in Syria, Libya, Congo, etc. My prayer therefore is that peaceful co-existence is continually sustained in our dear country.
Fola Aiyegbusi, a social commentator, writes through [email protected]
Discover more from Premium Times Nigeria
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
More News
