The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Inec

  • INEC must comply with ruling on prisoners’ voting right – Group

    …Writes AGF, NHRC, Interior minister, others

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has been asked to urgently take steps to prepare prison inmates across the country for participation in the next general elections in line with a subsisting judgment of the Federal High Court, Benin Division.

    The court while delivering judgment in the case filed by Victor Omonuwe and four others, in suit No: FHC/B/CS/12/2014, upheld prison inmates’ right to vote and directed the relevant agencies to take steps to ensure prisoners in the country enjoy such right.

    A criminal justice and prison reforms group – Citizens United for the Rehabilitation of Errants – Nigeria (CURE-Nigeria) made this call in a letter to INEC, dated July 11, 2016.

    It noted that over two years after the judgment, which was not appealed, the electoral body has refused to comply with it.

    Copies of the letter signed by CURE-Nigeria’s Executive Director, Sylvester Uhaa, were sent to the Attorney- General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Minister of Interior, Controller-General of the Nigerian Prisons Service, Executive Secretary, National Human Rights Commission and committees on Judiciary, human rights and legal matters in both the Senate and House of Representatives.

    Uhaa, who said his group had written INEC on the issue on July 28 last year, said the new letter was a reminder that the electoral body was under obligation to comply with a subsisting court judgment and ensure that the right of Nigerians to vote was not violated.

    “Consequently, we urge the commission, as we did in our previous letter, to take steps to register inmates in all the prisons across the country ahead of the 2019 general elections.

    “Voting by prison inmates, besides being their rights, has a tremendous rehabilitation and re-entry value, and we hope that Nigeria will join many countries such as South Africa, Ghana, Kenya and others to restore the right to vote to people in prison,” Uhaa said.

     

  • INEC and Abia stalemate

    Even if the smoldering crisis generated by Justice OkonAbang’s ruling, which sacked Governor OkezieIkpeazu of Abia State is under considerable control, the role of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC in facilitating that pass, will unlikely go down well with many.

    For, much of the confusion that trailed that ruling would have been stymied had the commission trod very cautiously in a manner expected of that supposedly impartial body. At issue was the indecent haste with which it issued the Certificate of Return to the beneficiary of the judgment, UcheOgah. Not just that, it went further to lie on the pendency of the notice of appeal and stay of execution of that court judgment.

    Initial comments from the commission had vehemently denied that Okezie filed a notice of appeal and a stay of execution, which legal experts said were the conditions that could bar that electoral body from executing that judgment.

    But the Attorney-general and Commissioner for Justice of Abia State came out swiftly with evidence that both the appeal and motion for stay of execution were duly filed and served; furnishing the name of INEC clerk that received them, the time and date they were received. Apparently, embarrassed by this disclosure, the commission was later to reverse itself, accepting that there was actually a notice of appeal but surprisingly feigned ignorance of the subsistence of a motion for stay of execution.

    But for the court judgment from the Abia High Court in Osisioma restraining the Chief Judge of the state or any other judge from inaugurating Ogah, he would have been sworn-in when he stormed the seat of government in Umuahia to claim the mandate given him by the court and aptly facilitated by INEC.

    Issues have been raised regarding the propriety of the order from theAbia high court. Governor Okezie has also been accused of judicial ambush and sundry tactics to stall the swearing-in of Ogah. We shall return to this later.

    On their part, the AbiaState government has also accused INEC of duplicity and compromise especially given its initial denials of the existence of the notice of appeal and stay of execution until the claims were roundly proven to be false. These denials and the hasty handing over of the Certificate of Return to Ogah have largely been interpreted by that government as evidence of INEC’s hidden motive in the matter.

    They found it curious that though the appeal and motion for the stay of execution were duly filed and served the electoral body on June 28, it still went ahead two clear days after, to issue the certificate of return to Ogah. This was further confirmed by counsel to INEC when he told Justice Abang’s court at the resumed hearing that “by issuance I meant that it was signed on June 28, but the actual presentation of the certificate was on June 30”.

    The government has also accused Ogah of attempting to assume the mantle of governance in an election he did not contest; vaulting ambition and seeking ascendancy into that office through the back door.

    It is difficult to exculpate INEC of allegations of complicity in the matter. It had no sufficient grounds rushing the issuance of the certificate of return when the matter was pending in court. So the Abia State government is on a solid footing to accuse it of bias in the instant case. It ought to have waited for the legal processes to have run their full course before action.

    And given what we know of these election cases, it does not take a genius to come to terms with the realty that the incumbent would definitely challenge the ruling. So INEC had no business embarking on that precipitous and pre-emptive voyage in utter disregard of its prospects for chaos.

    INEC’s position on the matter was further trivialized by its national commissioner in charge of the South-east, Lawrence Nwuruku when he said he was simply obeying court order by hastily presenting the certificate of return to Ogah and that if another court issues another order he would also obey it.It is not just a matter of obeying court order as the propriety of executing that judgment when it has already been challenged in court to the knowledge of that electoral body. That is the issue to contend with.

    It is wrong for Nwuruku to have presented the commission as a robot just obeying court orders without recourse to other developments that may impede their execution as this case has proven. Nwuruku also displayed crass ignorance of the inherent danger in the action when he said that if Ogah is sworn in and another court rules that another person should be sworn in, they will again swear that person in. It is not just as simple as it has been presented given its prospects for anarchy.

    And if one may wish to ask, was the opinion of the legal department of INEC sought in this matter? We raise this poser because, in matters of this nature in the past, INEC is known to have exercised considerable discretion on the appropriate recourse. Why that caution was thrown to the winds in the instant case, is at the root of the allegation that the electoral body had more than a passing interest in the matter.

    Ikeazu succinctly captured the contradiction in the whole process when he asked: so if it were in a matter of capital punishment, I would have been executed before my appeal is heard? That is the crux of the matter and the point where INEC got it all wrong. It should have allowed the legal process to run its full course.

    Moreover, the course of democracy, law and order in Abia State would be at great jeopardy if we accept Nwuruku’s position that Ogah should be sworn in and if the appeal court rules to the contrary, we should have Ikpeazu re-sworn in. That obviously, is nothing than an invitation to disaster. The proper thing to do is for the status quo to be maintained pending the determination of the appeals up to the Supreme Court.

    With that singular action by the electoral body, we have inevitably been entrapped to a situation where a governor is sitting in office while another person with a court judgment and a certificate of return is unable to assume office, a standoff of sorts with wider repercussions for peace and orderly conduct. INEC is largely culpable for this sordid state of affairs.

    So the matter is not as such with the ruling byJustice Abang as the indecent haste with which INEC aidedOgah to assume the mantle of leadership. It does not also have much to do with disclosures that the case, instituted in 2014 had suffered frustrations up to the Supreme Court before it was ordered for re-trial and assigned to the present judge. All those were legal processes conducted within the ambit of the law.

    The thrust of this piece is not the propriety of the judgment delivered by Justice Abang. That is the matter for the appellate courts to handle. No attempt is either being made to encumber Ogah from seeking the enforcement of his rights. If that right is propelled by ambition, so be it. But the proper things must be done before he can lay claims to such rights.And in the pursuit of that right,Ikpeazu’s own right to have his appeal determined must be respected.

    If it took the resort to self-help or judicial ambush for that to happen, it would seem the end has justified the means. If there is anything like judicial ambush in legal lexicon, then the judicial system that allows it has itself to blame.

    But more fundamentally, the judiciary must rise to the challenges of the suspicion that it is increasingly lending itself to manipulation by politicians to satisfy theirselfish ambitions. Such accusations have been quite rife before now and are being freely traded by parties in to case. The judiciary must not only remain an impartial arbiter but must be seen to be so.

  • INEC awaiting directives on Rivers rerun

    INEC awaiting directives on Rivers rerun

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is awaiting directives on the rerun in Rivers State, it has been learnt.

    About three weeks to the election, there were hints from the commission’s office in Port Harcourt, the state capital, that it had not begun preparation for the suspended polls, especially recruitment of ad hoc workers.

    It was learnt at the weekend that the commission was awaiting directives from Abuja to begin preparation for the rerun.

    INEC National Chairman Prof Mahmood Yakubu, late last month announced July 30 as the date for concluding the suspended election.

    Resident Electoral Commission (REC) Elder Aniedi Ikoiwak met with security agencies, party leadership and stakeholders on the need to enlighten their supporters on avoiding violence before, during and after the July 30 poll.

    But it was gathered that the commission had done some preparation though it had to wait till next week to recruit ad hoc workers for the poll.

    Efforts to reach Ikoiwak were unsuccessful last nignt, but INEC spokesman in Rivers State Anthonia Amaimo said the commission was “waiting for directives from Abuja to commence work”, although the date for the rerun had been announced.

    The rerun would hold in the three senatorial districts.

    But politicians and their parties said they had not received details of the rerun and polling units where the poll would hold.

  • INEC trains workers ahead of Ondo polls

    INEC trains workers ahead of Ondo polls

    THE Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) says it has commenced the training of 204 e- collation staff for the Novernment 26 governorship election in Ondo State.

    Mr. Olubunmi Egbeeye, Head of Voters Registration and ICT in the state, told the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) yesterday in Akure that the training was necessary for the conduct of the election.

    Egbeeye said the training, which would last for six days, was for all INEC workers in the 18 local government areas of the state.

    He added that the training would enhance the staff’s computer knowledge and keep them abreast of vital concepts and terms.

    “We want to get our staff acquainted with ICT knowledge and with all the new technology to be used during the gubernatorial election.

    But of the 50 governorship aspirants contesting the All Progressives Congress ticket for the November 26 election, only seven have officially notified and also paid the N2 million development levy.

    This was disclosed yesterday at the party’s secretariat in Akure when one of the aspirants, Hon. Aderin Adesida, came to the party secretariat in Akure to submit his letter of notification and the development levy.

    Others aspirants, who paid the development levy include, Mr. Awodeyi Akinfehinwa (Apata), Senator Ajayi Boroffice, Hon. Bode Ayorinde, Segun Abraham, Bukola Adetula and Paul Akintelure.

    According to the rules of conduct of the party, any aspirant who does not pay the development levy before July 25, will not be allowed to participate in the party’s primary election.

  • Sheriff rejects INEC’s acceptance of Ize-Iyamu as Edo PDP candidate

    Sheriff rejects INEC’s acceptance of Ize-Iyamu as Edo PDP candidate

    …As Makarfi harps on reconciliation

    The former National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Senator Ali Modu Sheriff, has rejected the recognition given to Pastor Osagie Ize-Iyamu as the candidate for the September 10 governorship election in Edo State.

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had, during the week, accepted Ize-Iyamu’s nomination. Ize-Iyamu’s name was submitted by the Ahmed Makarfi-led Caretaker Committee.

    But, speaking in Abuja yesterday, Sheriff’s deputy, Dr. Cairo Ojougboh, described INEC’s decision to accept Ize-Iyamu as a “mere rumour”.

    Ojougboh spoke while receiving a delegation of professionals from the Southsouth geo-political zone.

    Ojougboh said: ”We heard a rumour making the rounds that INEC has accepted another person as candidate of the PDP for the Edo State governorship election

    “I hereby dispel the rumour and categorically state that INEC has not yet communicated the decision to us”.

    According to him, INEC was still considering the judgements and court orders arising from the lingering leadership crisis

    He said the Federal High Court in Abuja had specifically asked the INEC to recognise only candidates presented by Sheriff.

    Ojougboh said: “The court in Port Harcourt is not superior to the court in Abuja, and as such cannot reverse the specific orders of the Abuja court ruling that INEC can only accept PDP candidates from the Sheriff-led executive for purposes of Edo and Ondo governorship elections.”

    He appealed to members of the party, particularly in Edo State, to remain calm as the matter was being sorted out. He urged the camp’s parallel candidate, Mr. Matthew Iduoriyekemwen, to continue with his electioneering campaign.

    The Makarfi camp has continued to record victories against the Sheriff camp in most of the court cases arising from the festering crisis in the party

  • Edo: Sheriff rejects INEC’s acceptance of Ize-Iyamu as PDP candidate

    Edo: Sheriff rejects INEC’s acceptance of Ize-Iyamu as PDP candidate

    The camp of ex-National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Senator Ali Modu Sheriff, has rejected the recognition given to Pastor Osagie Ize-Iyamu as the party’s candidate in the September 10 governorship election in Edo State.

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had during the week accepted Ize-Iyamu’s nomination as PDP candidate in Edo State.

    Ize-Iyamu’s name was submitted by the Ahmed Makarfi led caretaker committee.

    But speaking in Abuja on Wednesday, a key member of Sheriff’s faction, Dr. Cairo Ojougboh, described INEC’s decision to accept Ize-Iyamu as a “mere rumour.”

    Ojougboh spoke while receiving a delegation of professionals from the South-South geopolitical zone who called to declare support for the Sheriff camp.

    Ojougboh said, ‎”We heard a rumour making the rounds that INEC has accepted another person as candidate of the PDP for the Edo State governorship election

    “I hereby dispel the rumor and categorically state that INEC has not yet communicated the decision to us.”

    According to him, INEC was still considering all judgements and court orders arising from the party’s lingering leadership crisis

    He stated that the Federal High Court in Abuja had specifically asked the INEC to recognise only candidates presented by the Sheriff camp.

     

  • INEC’s misadventure

    The fact of the right of appeal to the Court of Appeal granted by the constitution under Section 220 (1), and afortiori, to the Supreme Court under Section 213 (1) of the same constitution is in itself tantamount to a stay of execution, for the legislature cannot grant the right to the appellant to argue his appeal and expect him to argue it as a dead man.
    – Justice Anthony Aniagolu in Nasiru Bello v AG Oyo State (1986).

    It is the glory and wisdom of our constitution, that to prevent any injustice, no man is to be concluded by the first judgement, but that if he apprehends himself to be aggrieved, he has another court to which he can resort to for relief.
    – Justice Chukwudifu Oputa in Bakare v Apena (1986).

    Thirty years ago, Nasiru Bello was sentenced to death by firing squad for armed robbery by the Oyo State High Court. His counsel assured him that he had a right of appeal and that he would not be executed until he exhausted that right. He was mistaken. On the advice of the attorney-general of the state, the governor ordered Bello’s execution and he was executed before his appeal was heard. Then began the battle by his family members for compensation because, according to them,  they have been deprived of their breadwinner’s support. They lost at the high and appeal courts and the matter went to the Supreme Court.

    The public wondered what will be the Supreme Court’s take on the matter. Will it uphold Bello’s execution as an open and close case  just as the high and appeal courts did? The issue at stake in Bello’s case was whether he should have been executed when he had appealed the verdict. Unlike a civil matter, there is nothing like applying for stay of execution of judgement in a criminal case. All a condemned man needs do is to exercise his right of appeal up to the Supreme Court. It is deemed that the appeal will act as a stay until the case is determined. This is why a condemned man like Chukwuemeka Ezeugo aka Rev King was not executed during the pendency of  his appeal at the appeal and Supreme courts. He was convicted by the Lagos High Court over nine years ago on January 11, 2007. The Supreme Court affirmed the verdict last February 25.

    As I write this on Tuesday night, Rev King is still on the death row. I have used the cases of Bello and King as analogies to discuss the vexed issue of stay of execution of judgement following recent developments in Abia State. A Federal High Court last June 27 sacked the governor, Dr Okezie Ikpeazu, and ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to issue the plaintiff, Dr Uchechukwu Ogah, a certificate of return (CoR) “forthwith”. INEC complied with the order ‘’immediately’’, despite being served with a notice of appeal and a motion for stay of execution of the judgement. In matters like this, opinions always differ, especially among lawyers, the very people who should know better, because of vested interests.

    Ogah’s lawyers are arguing that INEC did the right thing because its action, though misguided, favoured them. The Ikpeazu camp is, expectedly, condemning the commission for not waiting for the determination of its appeal before issuing Ogah the CoR. The Ikpeazu group tried to nip the Abia crisis in the bud. It wrote INEC intimating it of the filing of its appeal and a motion for stay, but the commission ignored the correspondence, issued Ogah the CoR and threw Abia into crisis. What would it have cost INEC to tarry until the disposal of the appeal before doing the needful? It would have cost the commission nothing.

    To now seek to hide under what it called the ‘immediacy’ requirement of Justice Okon Abang’s order to justify its action will not fly. INEC did not think it through before acting. Its action was hasty and unjustified though the court ordered it to act ‘’forthwith’’. If it were to be a criminal matter like that of Rev King, would the commission have executed him when his appeal is pending citing the ‘immediacy’ of the judge’s order? Public institutions like INEC, which should be non-partisan, must try as much as possible to stay so. They should like Caesar’s wife be above board. Why the hurry in issuing Ogah the CoR when the commission had already been served with processes showing that the case had gone on appeal?

    By its action, INEC constituted itself into an appellate court. By its action, it has concluded that Ikpeazu has no chance on appeal. By its action, it has shown its bias. By its action, it has decided that come what may Ogah will be the governor. So, because it has the CoR in large quantity, it should be issuing it anyhow? When its National Commissioner for Southeast, Ambassador Lawrence Nwuruku, made that careless statement on national television last June 29, I felt like throwing up.  As an umpire, INEC is required to be neutral and must be seen to be so; it should not join the fray. INEC ran into trouble because it interpreted the judgement by itself. If it had consulted its lawyers, it would have received experts’ advice which may have prevented the mess it has created in Abia.

    If the situation were beyond redemption like in the Bello case, the nation would have been foisted with a fait accompli. Thank God that despite INEC’s action, the situation is still redeemable. The courts and not INEC would have the last say on the matter. Truly,  an appeal does not constitute a stay, but it serves as a notice that the case is still hot and alive.  Being that the case, should the appellant be thrown out of office before the determination of his appeal? The answer is no. So, on being served with a notice of appeal, a law abiding person is not expected to take any action to destroy the subject matter of the case because he wants to enjoy the fruits of litigation. Unfortunately, this is what INEC did by issuing Ogah the CoR after being served with Ikpeazu’s appeal.

    The late Justice Aniagolu was unsparing of the Oyo State Government in his concurring judgement in the Bello case. Noting that the government “hastily and illegally snuffed off the life of an appellant whose appeal was pending without regard for the life and liberty of the subject and the principle of the rule of law”, the late justice said : “The brutal incident has bespattered the face of the government with the paintbrush of shame”. So has INEC’s handling of the Ikpeazu-Ogah matter brought it to public ridicule and scorn. But, we hope this is not the new face of INEC under the  Prof Mahmood Yakubu leadership.

  • Court to INEC chairman: Come for contempt proceedings

    Justice John Tsoho of the Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and its Chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, to appear in court and answer contempt proceedings against them.

    Justice Tsoho gave the order while ruling on arguments on whether or not the physical presence of INEC and its chairman was necessary for the court to determine the contempt proceedings initiated against them by Ejike Oguebego and Chuks Okoye – Chairman and Legal Adviser of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Anambra State.

    The judge rejected the argument by lawyer to INEC and Yakubu, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), that the nature of the contempt proceedings against his clients was civil and could be determined without their physical presence.

    Justice Tsoho said whether civil or criminal, contempt proceedings are always quasi-criminal, which required the physical presence of the alleged contemnor in court for him/her to be heard on whether or not the order of committal should be made.

    Relying on the provisions of Order 9 Rule 14 of the Judgment Enforcement Rules, Justice Tsoho said it was the duty of the court’s Registrar to issue and serve Forms 48 and 49 on parties in disobedience of court’s order for them to attend court, failing which a bench warrant may be issued against the alleged contemnors  to attend court and show cause why order of committal should not be made against them.

    “I hold that the alleged contemnors are under obligation to appear before this court to show cause why an order of committal should not be made against them,” the judge said.

     

  • Breaking: Court orders Abia governor to vacate office

    Breaking: Court orders Abia governor to vacate office

    A Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday ordered the Governor of Abia State, Okezie Ikpeazu, to vacate office with immediate effect for what submitting false information to his the People’s Democratic Party, for the party’s governorship primary which took place in December 2014.

    In the judgment, Justice Okon Abang ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to issue a certificate of return to the plaintiff, Uche Ogah, who scored second highest number of votes during the primary.

     

  • Court stays proceedings in suit challenging Buhari’s qualification

    A Federal High Court in Abuja on Thursday granted indefinite adjournment in the suit challenging the educational qualification of President Muhammadu Buhari.

    The adjournment granted by Justice Adeniyi Ademola is to subsist pending the determination of an appeal filed by the defendants in the case – President Buhari, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

    The judge adjourned the suit following an application by lawyer to the defendants, Kola Awodein (SAN), that the case be adjourned to enable the defendants prosecute their appeal against the court’s earlier ruling upholding the service of the originating processes on the President.

    The defendants also filed an application for a stay of proceedings pending appeal and an affidavit to prove that the Court of Appeal had entered the appeal.

    The affidavit was served on both the plaintiff, Nnamdi Nwokocha-Ahaaiwe and the court on Thursday.

    Nwokocha-Ahaaiwe opposed the application for stay of proceedings on the ground that having been served with the said affidavit right inside the court while the proceedings was on, he would require time to react to it.

    He later elected to leave the issue to “the discretion of the court” in order to save time.