Akwa Ibom election appeal ruling and other matters

 

By Ishaya Etsu

GIVEN Nigeria’s size and diversity, managing dif­ferent interests and identities has become not only important but absolutely necessary. Under the com­plex web of interest, any action or decision by any individual from any of the blocks that make up Nige­ria is not only interpreted as the decision of the block the person comes from but his whole tribe is held responsible and most times made to suffer for the perceived wrong doing of their tribes men.
It is for this reason the seeming recent interference in the judicial system by the government of Presi­dent Buhari to the detriment of South South states is viewed as something that may backfire against the North if not checked.
Given Buhari’s anti-corruption mantra, it would have been expected that any judge who compromis­es the course of justice either by induced judgements or deliberate violation of judicial procedure should be sanctioned whether there is a petition against him or not. Such pre-emptive action would have been in line with his claimed policy thrust and will serve to dissuade those collaborating with some politicians from continuing with such disservice to the rule of law. But from all indications, the government seems neck-deep in the whole process especially as it con­cerns Akwa Ibom and Rivers States.
A case in point is the recent Appeal Court Judge­ment in respect of Akwa Ibom and Rivers States. Some legal luminaries have argued that the judge­ment contradicted both the Supreme Court Prec­edents and the Constitution. They have warned the All Progressives Congress Federal Government to stop the wanton destruction of the country’s judi­ciary over what they termed as naked greed to take over control of the oil rich states at all costs. This ill-conceived political agitation, if not checked, is ca­pable of dividing the country.
It is surprising how the same Appeal Court which delivered judgement on the Lagos Governorship Election on the premise that the card reader can­not invalidate an election, and same was upheld by the Supreme Court, could turn around in the case of Akwa Ibom Judgement. The jurist used card reader to annul the election.
Specifically the Appeal Court in the case of Ambode Vs Agbaje had posited as follow: ….that the Card Reader has no Life of its own, and as a result, cannot be used to determine the result of an election, since it is not con­tained in the Electoral Act, 2010, as Amended.’
Accordingly, the appellate court’s judgment, delivered by Justice Ogbuinya held that: “…paragraph (13b) dis­plays a vitriolic attack on the irregularities germinating from the improper or non-use of the smart card readers in the polling units. “As it is, it has no life of its own as a ground. It endeavours to introduce the defects in the use of smart card readers. The evolution of the concept of smart card reader is a familiar one. It came to being dur­ing the last general election. On this score, it is a nascent procedure injected into our infant and fledgling electoral system to ensure credible and transparent election. “The extant Electoral Act (2010) which predates the concept (of card reader) is not its parent or progenitor. Since it is not the progeny of the Electoral Act, fronting it as a ground to challenge any election does not have its (the Electoral Act’s) blessing, nay Section 138 (1) of it.
“Put simply, a petitioner cannot project the non-pres­ence or improper use of smart card reader as a ground for questioning an election. It does not qualify as one. The Court of Appeal then upheld the Governorship Elec­tion Tribunal’s decision which struck out Agbaje’s peti­tion and upheld Ambode’s victory, in the April 11, 2015 Lagos State Governorship election.’
It is also noteworthy that the Supreme Court of the land upheld this judgement. It is, therefore, shocking to any well meaning Nigerian how the same Appeal Court could reversed itself when it came to Akwa Ibom Elec­tion Judgement Appeal. The volte face is so apparent that it would erode all sense of confidence in the judicial sys­tem and APC-led government if not redressed. More so, as they use an exhibit that was not admitted by the tribu­nal to cancel an election. All these amount to disservice to the rule of law.
President Buhari should prevail on the Appeal Court to explain to Nigerians why card reader and collation did not invalidate elections in Yobe, Imo , Lagos, Ogun and Oyo States, all APC States that had the same issue of accreditation. Whereas Akwa Ibom election is annulled based on card reader and colla­tion that was shown live on Channels TV.
The world awaits the Supreme Court to right this wrong and upturn the Judgement of Akwa Ibom State and Rivers States. Anything short of it therefore may not only mean that APC’s change was just a mantra to deceive the electorate to have their votes, it could also go a long way to change South South’s percep­tion of the North.
It would be recalled that in the earlier part of Jona­than’s regime Northerners resisted him fearing politi­cal marginalization, which means reduced access to the oil revenues and patronage that fuel Nigeria’s po­litical economy. But Jonathan’s actions from day one was that of far-reaching correction of economic and social imbalance between the North and the South. Political power sharing was a sensitive issue and in­terference with political process especially the judi­ciary was non-existent. At the end of his tenure, he made history as the first incumbent president to con­cede defeat and congratulate his opponent. The world is waiting to see how President Buhari consolidated on these democratic strides to keep Nigeria united. He should not bow to forces of greed and evil who are advising him that it is against national security if his party APC is not in control of the oil producing states thereby nudging him on to throw caution to the winds in a desperate attempt to win the oil rich states at all costs. The president should remember that he is president of Nigeria including the oil rich states and that whichever party they belong pose no threat to his office. He should, therefore, endevour to leave the citadel of justice sacrosanct as this is the last hope of the common man. For, if the citadel of justice is cor­rupt, the body of politics and by extension the society as a whole would be rotten and collapse.

.Etsu writes from Uyo.