Rivers Elections In The Eyes Of Supreme Court



The judgements of the Supreme Court on the governorship elections in several states, particularly Rivers and Akwa Ibom have put the apex court in the spotlight. Based on what some Nigerians and election observers witnessed, those elections were allegedly deeply flawed and marred with violence. But why would the nation’s highest court choose to be so daring as to give judgements that seem at odds with supposed facts on ground and also perceived public opinion. The court stuck to one basic point; yes INEC guidelines allowed for the use of card readers in the accreditation process but the law allowed for the manual accreditation of voters and INEC on its own cannot outlaw manual accreditation. That these judgements were made unanimously by the court also send a clear and loud message which nobody appears to have heard. According to the verdict in the Rivers governorship election which is similar to verdicts given in Lagos, Imo, Zamfara Ebonyi, and several other states as regard to the use of card readers is create: “accuracy and transparency of the accreditation process and to maintain the democratic norm of one-man-one-vote, by detecting multiple voting by voters, “Section 49 (1) and (2) of the Electoral Act which provide for manual accreditation of voters, is a stamp and remain a vital part of our electoral law.”
The outlining message that the Supreme Court is sending to Nigerians with its recent judgments is that our electoral laws are still too weak and need to be strengthened. In a way, the justices of the court are telling Nigerians that the electoral law needs tweaking in order to close any loopholes that can be exploited by politicians after the fact of elections and more importantly, the judgements are as much about what should happen in 2019 in terms of the Electoral Act as they are about what transpired during the 2015 general elections. If the verdict of the court in the case of Nyesom Wike of PDP  and the APC’s Dakuku Peterside can be seen in that light, then the justices of the court can be said to have the best interest of the country at heart. Again, if the Supreme Court is trying to force the hand of the executive and that of the legislative arm of government to strengthen the country’s electoral laws and help entrench democracy and the will of the people in future elections, then upholding elections that were marred with irregularities as the law presently allows is the price the country must pay.
But the odd thing is that the government of President Muhammadu Buhari may not be on the same page with the justices of the Supreme Court and has shown no interest in electoral reform. The most obvious sign of the government’s disposition to the strengthening the Electoral Act is its silence on the issue. As can be expected, every sitting government wants to leave an opening in the law that allows for the manipulation of elections. A more glaring sign than the silence is what the newly appointed INEC chairman, Prof Mahmood Yakubu had to say about future elections. Rather than commit to technology and electronic voting for future elections, the most he has conceded to, is using technology in the collation process. What exactly that means when voting is done manually is at the moment difficult to understand.
Now, the curious thing is that President Buhari has on more than one occasion been a victim of electoral fraud. Admittedly, Buhari was not elected president on the premise that he would embark on political reform; neither did he campaign from that position. The president however promised to prosecute those involved in electoral malpractices, only he may have to pay attention the electoral law first and embark on electoral reform as the justices of the apex court are trying to engineer with their judgments. So far, however, members of the president’s political party are doing the direct opposite. If anything at all, they are putting the justices of the court under intense pressure and scrutiny. Party leaders have gone as far as questioning the wisdom of the justices of the different courts, not only their integrity but also their patriotism. More damaging of all are insinuations that they have been compromised and at the centre of this is the APC candidate in Rivers, Dakuku Peterside whose allegations are based on hearsay and also letting his imagination run wild by reading the most extreme possible meaning into a handful of words uttered by a very indiscrete Nyesom Wike.

Justice Mary Odili is coincidentally married to an active politician and there is no escape from that. There was no crystal ball to tell that this would be the case in the future. However, it is trite that judges are related to human beings like the rest of us. As if she had known events would turn out like this. As it turns out, Justice Odili and her colleagues made a wise decision in leaving her out of the panels that presided over the final Rivers election cases.
President Buhari has expressed misgivings about the judiciary when it comes to the fight against corruption and he may even have to take the lead in weeding out corrupt judges. But when it comes to the Supreme Court, the president, at least for the sake of the country will have to assume at proven otherwise that it is made up of men and women of proven integrity, no different from his own.


EmoticonEmoticon