The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Inec

  • INEC can’t conduct credible polls, says Akeredolu

    The candidate of the defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) in the last governorship election in Ondo State, Mr. Rotimi Akeredolu (SAN), has said the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), as presently constituted, cannot conduct credible polls.

    He was reacting to the discredited governorship election in Anambra State.

    In a statement yesterday, Akeredolu said: “Anyone who still habours the illusion that INEC, as presently constituted, possesses the capacity to conduct any credible, free and fair election should have a rethink.

    “A situation where the electoral umpire, even by its own admission, failed to discharge its statutory functions creditably and is allowed to pontificate on the best way to solve a problem it created, wittingly, is deplorable.

    “The brazen contempt with which the generality of Nigerians are held by INEC officials, goaded by certain elements, should compel reactions from the people. “

    Akeredolu said the electoral body erred by conducting an election with a flawed voter register.

    He said: “We have contended strenuously that a compromised voter register cannot form the basis of a credible election. Having a sizeable chunk of the electorate consciously disenfranchised in a process that will throw up a new leadership, in spite of the ubiquitous presence of the national leadership of INEC, signals ominous occurrences next year, which may assume catastrophic proportions in 2015.”

    Akeredolu urged political parties to assume greater responsibility to end impunity.

    He said: “INEC springs up surprises each time there is an election. Fictitious names are injected heavily into the voter register to give the beneficiary of a fraud a comfortable edge over others.

    “Once this criminality is discovered, you are advised to go to court. There could be no election to be substantially affected in law when the register used for such election had been compromised.

    “Political parties have greater responsibilities to end impunity. The people must not allow the recent INEC shenanigan in Anambra to stand.”

  • ‘I’ll seek legal means to stop supplementary poll’

    The candidate of the Democratic Peoples Party (DPP), Mr. Chijioke Ndubuisi, yesterday said he will head for the Federal High Court, Awka, to stop the supplementary poll on Saturday.

    Ndubuisi said the November 16 governorship poll and the one held the following day by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) were a failure and a fraud.

    He said in a statement in Onitsha yesterday: “The election was characterised by unprecedented disenfranchisement, corrupt inducement, disappearance of ballot boxes, late arrival of election materials and or non-arrival of election materials. INEC officials sabotaged the process. Elections were not held in most parts of Anambra State, particularly in Idemili North and South, the stronghold of my party. There was massive, unprecedented and scientific rigging, just to deny us victory. Elections were held on Sunday, the holy day of Christians in a Christian-dominated area.

    “The November 16 governorship poll is defective and must be nullified in accordance with the law. INEC has even accepted that the election was flawed.

    “We urge the electoral umpire to take the bull by the horns by applying to the court for an order to nullify the flawed election in the interest of justice and fair play.

    “We also enjoin INEC to jettison the idea of a supplementary election as it is illegal, unlawful and alien to our constitution and electoral laws. It must not be allowed to stand.

    “Finally, we advise INEC to fix a date for another election, which should be held on February 27, while parties should begin their campaigns from December 1.

    “DPP and its governorship candidate will likely file a suit in the Federal High Court, Awka, to stop the planned supplementary election.”

     

  • INEC, PDP, Wada urge Supreme Court to dismiss case

    INEC, PDP, Wada urge Supreme Court to dismiss case

    •Judgment on February 21

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Kogi State Governor Idris Wada yesterday urged the Supreme Court to dismiss an appeal filed by a chieftain of the party, Jibril Isah Echocho.

    Echocho is challenging the legitimacy of the December 3, 2011, election, which produced Wada as governor.

    At the hearing yesterday, INEC, PDP and Wada, represented by J. M. M. Majiyagbe, Olusola Oke and Chris Uche (SAN), faulted the competence of the appeal and urged the court to dismiss it.

    Echocho challenged the legitimacy of the election before the Federal High Court on the grounds that it was wrongly held.

    The Federal High Court declined jurisdiction, as the case involved governorship election issues over which it lacked jurisdiction.

    Echocho went to the Court of Appeal, which upheld the decision of the Federal High Court, prompting his appeal to the Supreme Court.

    Adopting his brief yesterday, Majiyagbe urged the court to dismiss the appeal because he said the reliefs sought by Echocho could only be granted by an election tribunal.

    “The narrow issue is whether the Federal High Court can entertain electoral matters, especially in light of the reliefs sought by the appellant, one of which is that the court should set aside the election.”

    Uche noted that the Apex Court on September 10, last year upheld the election.

    He argued that having not taken part in the election, it was strange that he would seek to be declared the winner of the election he did not participate in.

    “The appellant sought to rely on the primary election of January 2011, which he won, but was canceled. In the case of Sylva against PDP, the Supreme Court held that the cancelled primary had become no issue and no one could rely on it.”

    Oke said Section 285 (2) of the 1999 Constitution vested exclusive jurisdiction in the election tribunal to determine issues relating to the conduct of elections and that Isah was wrong to have come to the High Court.

    To him, the High Court and Court of Appeal were right in dismissing the case, and urged the Supreme Court to do same.

    Oke told the court that PDP had the right to abandon a primary and conduct a new one.

    Echocho’s counsel Wole Olanipekun (SAN) submitted that the case was novel because it raised issues that had not been decided before.

    “This appeal has no precedent in this country. It calls for your Lordships’ intervention to protect the sanctity and potency of the judgment of the Supreme Court and the constitution.”

    He argued that the December 3, 2011, governorship election was held in violation of the Supreme Court’s judgment, which terminated the tenure of five governors.

    Olanipekun said his client could not have gone to the tribunal because his case did not fall within the grounds for filing a petition.

    Justice Mahmud Mohammed adjourned till February 21.

  • INEC can’t conduct credible polls, says Akeredolu

    The candidate of the defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) in the last governorship election in Ondo State, Mr. Rotimi Akeredolu (SAN), has said the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), as presently constituted, cannot conduct credible polls.

    He was reacting to the discredited governorship election in Anambra State.

    In a statement yesterday, Akeredolu said: “Anyone who still habours the illusion that INEC, as presently constituted, possesses the capacity to conduct any credible, free and fair election should have a rethink.

    “A situation where the electoral umpire, even by its own admission, failed to discharge its statutory functions creditably and is allowed to pontificate on the best way to solve a problem it created, wittingly, is deplorable.

    “The brazen contempt with which the generality of Nigerians are held by INEC officials, goaded by certain elements, should compel reactions from the people. “

    Akeredolu said the electoral body erred by conducting an election with a flawed voter register.

    He said: “We have contended strenuously that a compromised voter register cannot form the basis of a credible election. Having a sizeable chunk of the electorate consciously disenfranchised in a process that will throw up a new leadership, in spite of the ubiquitous presence of the national leadership of INEC, signals ominous occurrences next year, which may assume catastrophic proportions in 2015.”

    Akeredolu urged political parties to assume greater responsibility to end impunity.

    He said: “INEC springs up surprises each time there is an election. Fictitious names are injected heavily into the voter register to give the beneficiary of a fraud a comfortable edge over others.

    “Once this criminality is discovered, you are advised to go to court. There could be no election to be substantially affected in law when the register used for such election had been compromised.

    “Political parties have greater responsibilities to end impunity. The people must not allow the recent INEC shenanigan in Anambra to stand.”

  • Can we still trust Jega?

    Can we still trust Jega?

    I wonder what is going on now in the mind of Chief Ifeanyi Uba, the Labour Party candidate in the November 16 gubernatorial election in Anambra State about the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and its Chairman, Professor Attahiru Jega.

    A few weeks before the polls I asked the Nnewi born businessman/politician who was so confident he would win whether the thought of him being rigged out ever crossed his mind.

    He responded confidently that Professor Jega would never allow anything like that: ” Jega is not an Anambra man, Jega is coming there to conduct election and give life to Ndi-Anambra so that God would remember him.

    So Anambra’s election is going to be free and fair. How can they rig me out? Do you know who Professor Jega is? Did they rig anybody out in Edo? Was Edo election not under Jega? Did they rig anybody out in Ondo? Was the election there not conducted by Jega? Let us be optimistic in Nigeria that at least we have credible people in this country. We would have a peaceful election.”

    But after that sham called election conducted by Jega and his INEC. Chief Uba must be having a rethink about the electoral body and it’s chief umpire. The Labour Party candidate was not alone in exuding confidence about the ability of Jega to deliver a credible election in Anambra. Not a few Nigerians were like him, optimistic. But that optimism has now turned into fear. Fear for the future of democracy in this country as we move towards the 2015 general elections.

    Needless to go over the result of the Anambra election. You all know that by now. I am sure you are also aware that three of the major parties apart from the winner and a few others who could never have won anyway, have kicked against the result, calling for its cancellation and a fresh election conducted. They have advanced so many reasons for this, including the usual disappearance of names of eligible voters for the register, late or even non arrival of electoral materials, insufficient electoral materials, voting after official time, votes buying, rigging, voters intimidation and stuffs like that. And as usual. INEC would hear none of these. To the electoral body the election was ok save in a few places.

    Jega, though has come out to express disappointment at the conduct of some of his people, insists that the result of the election in areas where it was ‘successfully’ conducted will stand and has ordered a supplementary election in those areas where the election was inconclusive.

    Under the electoral law, I think Jega and his INEC are on solid ground to insist that the partial result will stand and a supplementary election to complete the result would take place. Their argument being that only the court or tribunal can cancel the result of an election that had been duly declared by the Electoral Officer.

    But the counter argument here is that what took place in Anambra on November 16 could not in any way pass for an election. Apart from INEC the winner and his party, no other serious group has anything complementary to say about that election. The Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ), Abuja Council that sent a team of independent observers to the election came out with a verdict that called into question the credibility of that result.

    If one could consider the position of the losing parties in the election as being not unexpected, that the result, including the process that produced it were described as sham by the NUJ speaks volume about that exercise and the ability of Jega’s INEC to conduct any credible election in the future.

    Prior to November 16, Jega you would recall promised the Anambra poll was going to be the best ever in the history of elections in this country. But if what happened in that so called election was the best that Jega was promising us, then the future of democracy and election in this country is doomed. And if a University Professor, a one time National President, Academic Staff Union of Nigeria Universities (ASUU) can not organize a successful and credible election in this country, then who can we trust to do a good job in this area for us?

    Jega has surrounded himself with colleagues from the ivory tower, people he could trust, people whose integrity he could vouch for. Yet we keep getting electoral embarrassments like this one from Anambra. The Resident Electoral Commissioner in Anambra and some of his INEC colleagues who were in charge of that election I learnt were chosen from the university and now see the outcome. If the supposed eggheads can’t perform this all important assignment for the nation, who then shall we call upon? Blockheads?

    But beyond the personnel, the question to ask is whether there is something in us that prevents us from having credible elections? Why is it that even if we send a saint to INEC, National Population Commission and similar organisations they end up disappointing us and leaving as sinners? Is it a problem of the system or the personnel? These are the areas we should look at in carrying out a postmortem of the Anambra election and this task should not be left to Jega or INEC alone. Whether Jega should stay or continue should also be considered along. The National Assembly should look into that election to determine what went wrong and what can be done to redress it without prejudice to the provisions of the electoral law.

    Governorship election is coming up soon in Ekiti and Osun States, can we trust Jega to do a good job there? Between now and those elections and even the 2015 polls is a short time and something needed to be done and urgently too to save the rest of Nigeria from the Anambra treatment.

    The complaints about that election should not be dismissed as mere rantings of the opposition. The fact that three strange bed fellows, Senator Chris Ngige of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Chief Ifeanyi Uba of Labour Party and Chief Tony Nwoye of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) could come together to say cancel the result because someone was wrong with the election should tell whoever cares to listen that indeed something was wrong, and I think INEC should care to listen; Jega must listen. Most independent observers have said so as well.

    If INEC is saying that only the court or tribunal could set aside the result as declared then the candidates disputing the result should head straight to the tribunal without delay. In the meantime INEC could help all the doubting Thomases, and I think there are millions of them by presenting to the public verifiable evidence(s) to show the election was free and fair in those areas where the result was announced. For the sake of his own integrity Professor Attahiru Jega must put all the cards on the table for all Nigerians to see that the election went well in some areas as he claimed, anything short of this, he will go down the route of one of his less illustrious predecessors, the late Justice Ovie Whiskey of FEDECO fame.

    Should the fact of his admission of some flaws or less than satisfactory manner in which the Anambra election was conducted not be enough to tell Jega that that election should and can not stand? After admitting that some of his officials were compromised in the election, what else is needed to convince him to cancel the result or ask court/tribunal to do so?

    Professor Jega should know that the patience of Nigerians with him is thinning out. The performance of his INEC in the Anambra election has seriously shaken our confidence and trust in him and the organisation he leads. We are in doubt as to whether to continue with him as head of the national electoral body or not as we move towards other crucial elections in 2014/2015. How he resolves this Anambra election crisis will determine whether we go with him all the way to 2015 or not. We are watching and waiting. But we won’t wait endlessly. 2015 is too important to be toyed with. Those who put him there should take note.

  • ‘Why INEC should have cancelled Anambra poll’

    ‘Why INEC should have cancelled Anambra poll’

    Following the dismal performance of Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in the ongoing governorship election in Anambra State, a legal issue that has been thrown up by the fiasco is the extent of the powers of the Commission to cancel the entire election.

    It is not in doubt that the election has been marred by serious acts of noncompliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended). For instance, there were confirmed reports from the Election Observers that thousands of voters could not find their names on the voters register resulting in the disenfranchisement of about 70 per cent of the electorate.

    There were reports that while under aged infants were registered and may have voted in areas such as Anaocha, Njikoka, Awka North , Nnewi North and South, Oyi and Ayamelum LGAs, in other areas like Idemili North, Idemili South, Dunukofia, Anambra East and Anambra West local government areas (LGAs), many registered voters could not find their names on the register and went home disappointed. Personalities whose names were omitted include the PDP candidate, Mr. Tony Nwoye along with his parents, his godfather and business mogul Prince Arthur Eze and many others who could not vote because of INEC bungling of the voter registration.

    There were reports of delays in the arrival of electoral materials to various polling units for various reasons.

    As a result, INEC cancelled the results in about 210 polling units spread across 16 local government areas and rescheduled what it termed a supplementary election for a date to be announced at the time of writing this script.

    It is worth recalling that the same scenario occurred in the 2010 Governorship election where out of 1.8Million registered voters only 301,232 voters or 16.32 per cent of the electorate were able to exercise their franchise in the said election. The winner of the election, Mr. Peter Obi just got 97,843 of the votes.

    In the reports by many observers it was found that pictures of Mike Tyson, Gani Fawehinmi, Malcom X, Nelson Mandela, Mariam Makeba and others dotted the register. Pictures of individuals were simply scanned into the register thereby making it totally fraudulent and unreliable. That was under Maurice Iwu-led INEC.

    In the 2013 election now declared inconclusive by INEC, three of the candidates namely Senator Chris Ngige of APC, Tony Nwoye of PDP and Ifeanyi Ubah of Labour Party have in several press conferences jointly called for the cancellation of the election while INEC through its spokesperson Kayode Idowu contends once a returning officer announced the result of any election, there is no way the electoral commission can cancel its outcome.

    It stressed that any objection to the election results by any aggrieved person should be channeled to the courts or the election tribunal.

    The commission advised any political party not satisfied with results declared so far in the last Saturday governorship election in Anambra State to either go to court or the election petition tribunal to seek redress, in line with the 2010 Electoral Act, as-amended.

    The major beneficiary of the electoral heist, the All Progressive Grand Alliance, (APGA) supports INEC’s point of view.

    Just last Friday, the INEC Chairman addressed a press conference where he admitted that INEC had disappointed many Nigerians in its handling of the Anambra election but in a typical Maurice Iwu style, he boldly rejected the calls for an outright cancellation of the sham election.

    I think INEC Chairman is blowing hot and cold at the same time on this point. INEC had on Monday the 18th announced cancellation of results in some 210 polling units across 16 local government areas of Anambra state and fixed a ‘supplementary’ election for November 30.

    The question that then arises; on what authority did INEC cancel the results for the 210 polling units now fixed for the ‘supplementary’ election? Was it pursuant to an order of a court or tribunal as now argued by the Commission or was it by the powers vested in it by law?

    The simple truth and answer is that it was INEC that cancelled the results from those polling units and wards in the exercise of its powers derived from the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria; to organise, undertake and supervise all elections to the offices of the President and Vice-President, the Governor and Deputy Governor of a State, and to the membership of the Senate, the House of Representatives and the House of Assembly of each State of the Federation.

    The Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) in several sections gives INEC the power not only to cancel elections but to declare it null and void.

    For instance in Section 54(3) of the Act, it is provided therein that “Where the votes cast at an election in any polling unit exceed the number of registered voters in that polling unit, the result of the election for that polling unit shall be declared null and void by the Commission and another election may be conducted at a date to be fixed by the Commission where the result at that polling unit may affect the overall result in the Constituency.”

    If INEC can declare a result from a polling unit where over voting occurs , null and void, then it follows logically that the Commission can declare the entire process in the constituency null and void where it discovers that that there had been widespread disenfranchisement of voters and/ or other electoral malpractices.

    In the 2011 General Election, INEC under the leadership of Prof Jega, on April 2, cancelled the election that was ongoing in about 20 states due to late or non delivery of sensitive election materials like result sheets and ballot papers.

    The election was subsequently postponed to the 9th of April 2011. Nobody, to the best of my recollection questioned INEC’s power to cancel the process and start on a clean slate.

    INEC power to cancel or declare null and void an ongoing election like the one in Anambra State is not in doubt and my position is duly supported by the provision in subsection (4) of Section 53 of the Electoral Act which states that: (4) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (2) and (3) of this section the Commission may, if satisfied that the result of the election will not substantially be affected by voting in the area where the election is cancelled, direct that a return of the election be made.

    The phrase ‘where the election is cancelled’ can only mean a cancellation done by the Commission for one reason or the other. The meaning may also accommodate a cancellation done by a court or tribunal.

    I am not unaware of the provisions in Section 68(1) of the Electoral Act which states that “the decision of the Returning Officer on any question arising from or relating to-

    (a) unmarked ballot paper;

    (b) rejected ballot paper; and

    (c) declaration of scores of candidates and the return of a candidate, shall be final subject to review by a tribunal or court in an election petition proceedings under this Act.”

    This section has been construed in a plethora of cases such as —— Enemuo v. Duru (2004) 9 NWLR (Pt 887) 75 and Abana v. Obi (2004) 10 NWLR (Pt.88l) 319 at 365, INEC Vs Abubakar (2009) 2 NWLR (Pt 1124), 29. In the latter case involving the Senate President, David Mark the Returning Officer cancelled the results of two local government areas before making his return.

    The lower tribunal approved of the decision and ordered a rerun election. On appeal the Court of Appeal set aside the judgment of the tribunal and held that “It is very clear from the ordinary grammatical meaning of this provision that the power of returning officer is limited to-

    (i) declaration of scores of candidates; and

    (ii) return of a candidate.

    With regard to these two issues, the decision of the returning officer is final subject to review only before an election tribunal or this court.

    No power is granted to the returning officer to canceled results of an election and if he purported to have canceled any results, it was ultra vires, his power. And it is a nullity.” Per Belgore JCA

    INEC is relying on the above provision to reject the call by well meaning Nigerians including Election Observers for total cancellation of the process.

    INEC is wrong to rely on this provision.

    The Anambra governorship election is still ongoing unlike in David Mark’s case where the process had ended; Anambra election still at the collation stage awaiting the holding of a ‘supplementary’ election now fixed for Saturday, November 30, 2013.

    The process like the situation in 2011, can be aborted at this stage because of the false start by INEC.

    It is worth noting that the LGA results were announced after about 16 hours interval of the results being kept at INEC State Headquarters in “tamper proof bags” by the LGA Collation Officers and their public announcement.

    The absence of contemporaneity between the submission of the results and its public announcement has robbed the process of any credibility, transparency and integrity.

    The State Collation Officer, Prof James Epoke, the Vice Chancellor of the University of Calabar announced that the election had become ‘inconclusive’ because the number of voters in the cancelled areas can make a difference in the final outcome of the election.

    Epoke going by the provisions of the Electoral Act is not the Returning Officer for the Governorship election and cannot therefore declare any of the candidates as winner.

    Section 27(1) of the Electoral Act makes it clear that the Returning Officer shall be the person to announce the result and declare the winner of the election at the State Collation Centre.

    The Act did not combine the duties of collation and returning in one person. INEC cannot use its Election Manual or Guidelines to override or vary the extant provisions of the Act as it had done in its latest manual. Prof Epoke as the State Collation Officer and the Commission CAN cancel the returns from the local government areas.

    Therefore, it is submitted in conclusion that at this stage having regard to the serious infractions of the electoral law as observed by the election monitors, the power of cancellation already exercised in respect of some electoral wards and considering the public admission by INEC Chairman, Prof Jega that indeed some of his officials had sabotaged the Anambra process , INEC has the power and indeed the duty to cancel the remainder of the process.

    No credible result can emanate from an election as discredited as Anambra 2013 Governorship election. Ex nihilo nihil fit-out of nothing, nothing comes out.

     

  • NBA disappointed with INEC

    The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has expressed disappointment over the inconclusive Anambra State governorship election. At its National Executive Council (NEC) meeting in Nasarawa State, the association urged the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to avoid such mistakes in future elections. NBA President Okey Wali (SAN) said: “The NBA is concerned with the operational and logistics challenges that led to the inconclusiveness of the election and the consequent ordering of supplementary elections in some wards and polling units in the state. “The NBA recognises the fact that elections are conducted by human beings and those mistakes may be made and projections may fall far of expectations in an election. “However, the NBA views as very embarrassing and unacceptable the inconclusiveness of the Anambra State Governorship elections occasioned by operational and logistic challenges in an election supervised by 6 National Commissioners, 15 Resident Electoral Commissioners and a galaxy of permanent staff from the contiguous states.” He continued: “The inconclusiveness of the said elections and the serious operational and logistics challenges that gave rise to the supplementary elections have created serious doubts in the minds of Nigerians, regarding the preparedness of the Independent National Electoral Commission to conduct acceptable elections in 2015. “The NBA is also concerned that there apparently, still are, highly compromised officials within the Commission and these officials have been playing critical roles in the conduct of elections in Nigeria,” the association said. NBA said all the officials identified to have compromised their oath of office and official functions in the conduct of the Anambra Governorship Elections should be arrested and proceeded against in properly constituted courts. It said INEC and the National Assembly must move fast and finalise the promulgation of the Electoral Offences Commission Act to deal with the arrest and prosecution of electoral offenders. Such a Commission, it said, will be in a better position to deal with the challenges posed to our electoral process by the brazen commission of electoral offences in our electoral process.” Wali added: “The Independent National Electoral Commission must carry out a surgical operation of its processes and procedures. It must tackle frontally the recurring challenges of operational and logistic failure ahead of the 2015 general elections. “INEC must also intensify continuous voters’ registration and weed out the fraudulent names that are self evident in the current register as test is fundamental to the credibility of future elections. “The NBA urges all political parties and candidates who contested the November 16, 2013 Governorship elections in Anambra State to carry out their protests within the ambit of the law and the constitution. “The complaints, petitions and grievances relating to the election must also conform to the provisions of the constitution and the electoral Act. All the candidates and political parties must renew their faith in the courts as their final arbiter in our electoral process.” NBA said it supports the proposed National Conference, adding that it would articulate its own position present it the Proposed National Conference. “Permit me to state that the NBA shall only support a Conference whose report shall be final, binding and validated by Nigerians through a referendum,” Wali said. NBA re-iterates its calls insistence on an independent judiciary, saying: “Government must recognise that it is only the existence of a virile, fearless and independent Judiciary that can guarantee an enduring democratic government, and the maintenance of law and order. “It must be recognised that a good civilian administration in Nigeria will provide the enabling environment for foreign investments, economic growth and social development.”

  • INEC: Shame of Anambra poll

    INEC: Shame of Anambra poll

    Ali said although the Electoral Act empowers INEC’s Returning Officer to cancel election at a certain stage, in the circumstance of the Anambra case, it would be ideal for those aggrieved to allow the court make pronouncement on it.

    “Whatever anyone says now will be in the realm of speculation. This is because the whole facts are not before the public.

    “Yes, under the Electoral Act, a Returning Officer can cancel election at a point in the process. But I will suggest that whoever is aggrieved should approach the court and allow the court make a pronouncement on the issue.

    Kalu said INEC cannot cancel an election which result has been announced. “The decision as far as our law is concerned is that once INEC has announced a result, it cannot cancel the one it has announced. Any result announced can only be cancelled by a court of competent jurisdiction,” Kalu said.

    Nwobike agreed, saying sentiments should not be brought to issues of law. “INEC cannot on its own cancel the entire election with respect to the areas that had no challenges. All INEC can do is to conduct a supplementary election, but they cannot cancel it. It’s only the court that can cancel it.

    “You will recall that results in some of the local governments have already been released. So it has now left the province of INEC’s competence to cancel. We should also not that there is a difference between politics and law. Those who are calling for cancellation of the entire election are only speaking on the basis of politics.

    “But on the basis of law, INEC has no legislative authority under the Constitution or Electoral Act to cancel the elections in respect of the areas where results have been announced.”

    Ofuokwu said only a court can cancel the election, and that any aggrieved party should go to court to seek redress.

    He added: “What happened in Anambra State on saturday 16th November is indeed a shame and a monumental failure on the part of INEC. Its an indication of what to expect in 2015 and if we must salvage our sinking democracy then Prof. Attahiru Jega and his principal staff’ must be advised to resign honourably.

    “Jega and his team cannot complain of lack of fund. Supplementary election is now been smuggled into our electoral lexicon as a result of the ineptitude of INEC which is long overdue for staff overhaul.

    “Nevertheless I subscribe to the fact that there is indeed a cogent and verifiable reason to organise a fresh election in Anambra state as a whole. The charade that transpired last saturday was designed to disenfranchise many & to favour a few. Who is funding the supplementary election? If I may ask.

    “This culture of waste been forced on Nigerians by INEC must cease forthwith or else they will accelerate Nigeria’s descend to bankruptcy,” Ofuokwu said.

    Adelodun praised INEC for admitting that there were some lapses in the conduct of the election in Anambra.

    He said under the Electoral Act, it was the court who can order the cancellation of any election.

    Adelodun however noted that for the court to order the cancellation an election, the complainant must prove that such irregularities were sufficient to invalidate the entire process.

    “INEC cannot on its own engage in the cancellation of the entire election conducted in a state because of the few cases of irregularity recorded in some areas.

    “It is for those, who feel aggrieved to go to court. And if they can show that the irregularity was sufficient to substantially credibility of the election, the court can order a cancellation.

    “INEC’s position is very right. INEC was humble enough to admit that there were some lapses. I think it must be commended,” Adelodun said.

    Though it refuses to admit it, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has a problem on its hands. How will it handle parties opposed to the supplementary election it has fixed for Anambra State on Saturday? The All Progressives Congress (APC), Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Labour Party (LP) have resolved to boycott the election, which INEC is insisting on conducting despite the glaring irregularities in the November 16 poll.

    Observers faulted the poll, describing it as “a sham” because it was conducted without complying with Electoral Act.

    By INEC’s admission, the electoral process was compromised in Idemili North and South local government areas of Anambra State by its electoral officers. A total of 113,113 votes were subsequently cancelled. The cancelled votes were of such substantial significance that a winner could not emerge.

    Following its admission that the election was flawed, it was expected that INEC would cancel the poll. But it claimed the court is the only one that could cancel the election since the results had been declared.

    Announcing the date for the supplementary election, INEC chairman Jega said the inconclusive poll complied sufficiently with the Electoral Act and would, therefore, not be cancelled.

    “We regret that in spite of our intention, the Anambra election did not turn out to be the best election that the commission has conducted so far. We regret the challenges that we faced in the conduct of this election.

    “But in our assessment there is no other decision that we as a commission can take or respect other than the declaration by the Returning Officer to conduct a supplementary election in those areas where the results were cancelled before the final return is made.”

    He was quick to add, however, that regardless of the inadequacies “there was substantial compliance with the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) in the conduct of the election and that a substantial majority of the complaints that have been made cannot be substantiated.

    “There is no doubt that there was the challenge of late commencement of the elections. There was no doubt that this late commencement in many units was accounted for by delay in the deployment of election officials.

    “There was no doubt that in some polling units materials arrived late. But where it became necessary to adjust the time of commencement and time of finishing of accreditation and voting, we have done so and elections had taken place peacefully and successfully.”

    The APC, which rejected the supplementary election, said since no candidate was declared winner, INEC could cancel the election.

    Among the reason given by the party for a cancellation was that a tainted Voters’ Register was used. The register was said to be different from the one issued to parties, leading to only 451,826 voters finding their names on it. INEC claimed to have registered 1,763,751 voters.

    The party also listed the failure to deploy election officials in sufficient numbers; election materials not distributed in a timely manner; INEC’s failure to respond to operational challenges on time; recruitment of election officials at the election venue and their deployment without any form of training as factors that invalidated the election.

    The party said INEC’s admission of irregularities in 16 local government areas, comprising 1,380 polling units with 600,000 voters affected; disenfranchisement of many voters, and a situation where results were brought without being publicly announced by the local government area collation officers were in violation of the Electoral Act.

    “We respectfully demand that the commission discontinue all arrangements for the conduct of the said ‘Supplementary Election’. We also demand that no candidate in the said election should be returned as the winner pending the conduct of fresh election.

    “Our demand is predicated on the serious irregularities and non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act 2010 as amended which characterised the conduct of the said election.

    “To proceed with the election as proposed by your commission will amount to a gruesome assault on the right of the people of Anambra State to elect a governor of their choice and a legitimising of a grave travesty of the electoral process as witnessed during the November 16, 2013 Governorship Election,” APC said.

    The party insisted that INEC was not constrained by the Electoral Act in cancelling the governorship poll. “Having regard to the foregoing, it is inevitable that the election is fundamentally flawed and cannot be redeemed by the proposed ‘Supplementary Election.”

    INEC Chairman Prof Attahiru Jega’s Chief Press Secretary Kayode Idowu was quoted as saying that “by law, those results are now beyond the purview of INEC to invalidate. Only the courts have that power now to do so.”

     

    What does the law say?

    Some lawyers said INEC was not restricted in any way from cancelling the election. According to them, a correct reading of the Electoral Act 2010 as amended is to the effect that INEC cannot reverse itself where a candidate in the election has been returned as a winner.

    According to a constitutional lawyer, Rotimi Fasakin, since a winner was not announced, it was still within the commission’s purview to cancel the election.

    He said Section 27(2f) of the 2010 Electoral Act (as amended) gives the guideline.

    It states: The Returning Officer shall announce the result and declare the winner of the election at: (f) State Collation Centre in the case of election of a Governor of a State.

    Fasakin said since the Returning Officer did not declare a winner, INEC has no excuse not to cancel an election which it admitted was massively flawed.

    “Did the action specified in Section 27 (2f) of the Electoral Act take place at the state collation centre? If not, would that not mean that the results have not been declared and the electoral process, according to the electoral law, is still under the control of INEC?

    “Can the court adjudicate on an electoral process that is inchoate and effectively still under INEC’s purview and control?

    “How can INEC have power to cancel 113,113 votes and suddenly become powerless to cancel others that bore the imprimatur of the same inimitable INEC tardiness and corruption?” Fasakin said.

    The lawyer accused INEC of choosing when to use the court as an excuse and when not to obey its orders.

    “The sad narrative of Jega’s INEC is in embarking on ruinous vacillation without any scrupples. Remember, despite the Court of Appeal’s 12-paragragh order to Jega’s INEC to make available to the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) all documents used in conducting the 2011 Presidential election, the electoral body refused.

    “Why? Professor Jega said releasing the electoral register would compromise national security. This argument is flawed on two fronts: Our electoral law makes it mandatory for INEC to make available whatever the court orders.

    “At the last check, Jega is the chief electoral officer and NOT the National Security Adviser. The INEC chief got away with that infamy because Nigeria, as presently constituted, is disorderly. Whatever satisfies the President’s interest becomes law. Unfortunately, unless something drastic happens, we should know that the 2015 election is already a bungled one,” Fasakin said.

    Another lawyer, Mr Onyebuchi Nwaogbo, recalled that former INEC chief Prof. Maurice Iwu had warned in the run-up to the 2010 Anambra State Election that the commission would cancel the election in the event that there were serious malpractices.

    He also recalled that INEC cancelled the 2007 Imo State Governorship Election and conducted a fresh poll which saw the emergence of Mr. Ikedi Ohakim. “This may be considered a precedent,” he said.

    “The functions of the Commission as set out in Part I of the Third Schedule to the 1999 Constitution as amended are ‘organize, undertake and supervise’ all elections to the offices of the president and governor, among others.

    “At any rate, Jega had tacitly conceded INEC’s enablement to cancel any election, merely arguing that ‘there is no substantial evidence to support outright cancellation of the process.’

    “Indeed, it is beyond debate that INEC is empowered to cancel elections in the event of over voting, for instance.

    “Section 53(2) of the Electoral Act 2010 as amended enacts that ‘Where the votes cast at an election in any polling unit exceed the number of registered voters in that polling unit, the result of the election for that polling unit shall be declared null and void by the Commission and another election may be conducted at a date to be fixed by the Commission where the result at that polling unit may affect the overall result in the Constituency.

    “Section 53(3) enacts that ‘Where an election is nullified in accordance with subsection (2) of this section, there shall be no return for the election until another poll has taken place in the affected area.’”

    According to Nwaogbo, Section 53(4) however provides: “Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (2) and (3) of this section the Commission may, if satisfied that the result of the election will not substantially be affected by voting in the area where the election is cancelled, direct that a return of the election be made.”

    Analysts argue that in view of the highly widespread irregularities that beset the election as noted even by INEC’s accredited observers, the election should have been cancelled.

    According to them, given that INEC is empowered to “organise, undertake and supervise,” election, it sufficiently able to cancel it where there is widespread irregularities.

    Observers note that whatever reasons compelled Maurice Iwu to hold fresh elections in Imo in 2007 after canceling the previous elections, the fact of Nigerian political history is that no law court’s order was obtained by INEC or any of the candidates before the cancellation.

    To them, it does not seem tenable as claimed by INEC that only law courts can nullify flawed elections. Maurice Iwu’s INEC in 2007, cancelled the Imo gubernatorial elections once it emerged that violence threatened in some areas.

    A lawyer, Donald Ujokanma, said there was no basis for INEC’s refusal not to cancel the election.

    “I think INEC Chairman is blowing hot and cold at the same time on this point. INEC had on Monday the 18th announced cancellation of results in some 210 polling units across 16 local government areas of Anambra state and fixed a ‘supplementary’ election for the 30th of November.

    “The question that then arises: on what authority did INEC cancel the results for the 210 polling units now fixed for the ‘supplementary’ election? Was it pursuant to an order of a court or tribunal as now argued by the Commission or was it by the powers vested in it by law?

    “The simple truth and answer is that it was INEC that cancelled the results from those polling units and wards in the exercise of its powers derived from the Constitution.

    “The Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) in several sections gives INEC the power not only to cancel elections but to declare it null and void. For instance in Section 54(3) of the Act, it is provided therein that ‘Where the votes cast at an election in any polling unit exceed the number of registered voters in that polling unit, the result of the election for that polling unit shall be declared null and void by the Commission and another election may be conducted at a date to be fixed by the Commission where the result at that polling unit may affect the overall result in the Constituency.’

    “If INEC can declare a result from a polling unit where over voting occurs , null and void, then it follows logically that the Commission can declare the entire process in the constituency null and void where it discovers that that there had been widespread disenfranchisement of voters and/ or other electoral malpractices,” Ujokanma said.

    Meanwhile, Lagos lawyer, Mr Jiti Ogunye has questioned the legality of the supplementary election.

    He said there is no room or provision in the Electoral Act or in the Constitution for a supplementary election.

    “Broadly, under the Electoral Act, there are four types of election: a general election, a bye election, a fresh election or rerun election, and a run-off (second ballot or third ballot) election, as the case may be…

    “It is our considered submission that Section 26 of the Electoral Act, 2010, as amended, only contemplates the postponement of a scheduled election before the “arrival” of the date appointed for the conduct of the election on any of the three grounds (reasons) therein contained.

    “he postponement must be before or ahead of the date earlier appointed, not during or after. Further, the postponement of an election date and the appointment of a new date for the postponed election must be done pari passu. Under the Section, an indefinite postponement is not envisaged or permissible.

    “This Section is, therefore, not a statutory authority for the now familiar absurdity in Nigeria’s electoral system, called ‘supplementary election’. There is no legal backing, in the Electoral Act or in the Constitution, for this travesty of electoral practice,” Ogunye said.

     

    Contrary view

    To other lawyers, the aggrieved should approach the court.They said it was tidier to allow the court make a pronouncement on the issue after being provided with all the facts.

    Those who spoke include Mallam Yusuf Ali (SAN), Chief Awah Kalu (SAN), Dr Joseph Nwobike (SAN), Mr Adebayo Adelodun and a constitutional lawyer Ike Ofuokwu.

     

  • Anambra poll: Jega’s apology, admission of incompetence

    THE public apology tendered by the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof Attaihiru Jega over the conduct of the governorship election in Anambra State is an admission of failure.

    The governorship candidate of the defunct Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) in Ondo State, Prince Soji Ehinlanwo, said this in an interview with The Nation.

    Ehilanwo said he supported the position of the governorship candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Dr. Chris Ngige and other opposition parties calling for the cancellation of the election.

    He urged all stakeholders to remain resolute in their struggle to fight the travesty.

    Ehinlanwo hailed the leadership of the APC for its unwavering support for Ngige.

    The APC chieftain recalled that all the issues complained about over last year’s election in Ondo State were present in the Anambra election such as manipulation of voter register, late arrival of election materials in areas considered to be strongholds of APC and falsification of election results among others.

    He urged all genuine patriots across the country to consider the implications of this development for the 2015 elections and the country’s democracy.

  • Anambra poll: An opportunity missed

    Anambra poll: An opportunity missed

    The forces malevolently interested in the November 16 Anambra governorship poll were much stronger than the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) could withstand or manage. No matter what INEC did, the election was bound to fail; for the stakes in that poll were so high that even if the electoral body had mustered enough administrative acumen and integrity to superintend the election, the political dynamics in both the state and the country had already spawned too many sinister factors capable of undermining the poll.

    Much attention has been paid to INEC’s failings in that election as an explanation for the almost comprehensive failure of the governorship poll. Because of this failure, the INEC chairman, Attahiru Jega, has himself been described as a failure. In addition, many have called for the cancellation of the poll since it could not be guaranteed that the pollution and manipulation noticed in some polling areas had not affected the entire process. Professor Jega himself acknowledged that in some parts of the state, his men sabotaged the election. He was thoroughly disappointed, he said, that in spite of all the preparations for that poll, the election still miscarried badly. And though he didn’t quite say it, it appeared that the sabotage he talked about was aimed at the feisty All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, Chris Ngige.

    The Anambra poll miscarried for two main reasons. But before considering the reasons, it is important to make one or two observations about the election. First, I think it was unwise of Professor Jega to have drafted so many top level INEC staff to supervise the poll, and also encourage the overwhelming policing of the same poll. By taking these extraordinary steps in the hope that he would deliver a near perfect election, he robbed himself and his commission of the opportunity to know how they would have performed were the 2015 polls to be held all over the country on November 16. In 2015, it is evident that neither the commission nor the security agencies would have the benefit of the number and stature of the officials deployed in Anambra for the inconclusive governorship poll of two Saturdays ago. The poll should have been used as a dress rehearsal for the 2015 polls. Second, by now Professor Jega and the frustrated electorate will have realised that it takes more than an INEC chairman’s well-meaning disposition and the deployment of overwhelming force to deliver a free and fair election.

    The failed Anambra poll can be explained in two ways. First is the simple fact that the Jonathan presidency has no interest whatsoever in ensuring a free and fair poll, notwithstanding its repeated homilies on the sanctity of the electoral process. Judging from the spectral silence of the presidency on the obvious and deliberate sabotage of the poll, and the effusive and exuberant praise of the same poll by the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), it was clear that from the perspective of the Jonathan presidency, the goal of the election was to defeat Dr Ngige, not to ensure fair poll or give victory to the PDP candidate. The obsession against Dr Ngige is in turn informed by the overall strategic interest of the ruling party to checkmate the rising profile of the APC and stall, if not completely weaken, the opposition’s increasingly shrill and critical voice. This explains why the PDP was eager to endorse the misshapen poll and give the impression of being detached from crass partisanship, though its candidate lost in questionable circumstances.

    As part of this strategy of weakening, stalling or reversing the power of the APC, the PDP will next year attempt to take at least one state from the APC in the Osun and Ekiti elections and ride that momentum towards the 2015 polls. Two main factors underscore the strategy against the APC. One is the fact that Dr Jonathan himself lacks the intrinsic depth and vision to remake the country as a virile, progressive and pacesetting nation. Two is the fact that deliberately or accidentally, Dr Jonathan has managed to assemble a group of Machiavellian advisers and close aides who have gross loathing for principles. They are adept at reading the lips of the president and sabotaging every law and constitutional provision militating against the president’s re-election. Therefore, between Dr Jonathan’s surrender to devious politics and the energetic enthusiasm of his aides to foment trouble, everything, including the laws and constitution, not to talk of elections in particular, is fair game for subversion.

    The second reason the Anambra poll miscarried is the connivance of the state’s elite. No one denies the atrocious manipulations that undermined the integrity of the poll. But to remedy these atrocities, INEC plans a supplementary election slated for the end of this month. While there are calls for total cancellation of the poll from among a not-so-substantial number of Anambrarians and an overwhelming number of non-Anambrarians, the state’s elite have indicated the poll is not so irredeemable that a supplementary poll cannot correct. In media comments and television discussions, as well as jurisprudential expositions, the said elite have struggled to justify the poll and denounce the APC, its candidate, and any other person bold enough to dismiss the election as a sham. It is not surprising that such connivance offers endorsement for the electoral chicanery of two Saturdays ago and also provides adequate grounding and philosophical underpinning for the subversion of the electoral process.

    One of those philosophical underpinnings was the incredulous argument that Dr Ngige represented the face of the Southwest’s expansionist agenda. The state’s ruling party, the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), was the only surviving Igbo party that must not be humiliated, they said. It no longer mattered that APC’s Dr Ngige was their son, or that he had ruled the state meritoriously and can probably do much better than his rivals, or that his competence could not be doubted at all. The unabashed suggestion that Dr Ngige represented outsiders harked back to the Yoruba/Igbo rivalry of the 1950s and 1960s, and gave the impression that little progress had been made in Southwest/Southeast relationships. To these conniving analysts and amateur philosophers, it does not matter how the APGA candidate wins.

    But such dangerous reasoning carries equally dangerous drawbacks. It shows that the Southeast has learnt nothing, forgotten nothing, and has all along been an impassive observer of the changing dynamics of Nigerian politics and geopolitics. Even though Dr Ngige’s candidature was the best opportunity for the Southwest to build a credible and durable bridge to the Southeast, it was even a much better opportunity for the Southeast to expand its reach nationally and also break the implacable iron curtain that has seemed to divide the Southwest and the Southeast. For a region desirous of winning the presidency in the years ahead, it is strange that the lessons of MKO Abiola’s victory in the 1993 presidential election are lost on them.

    It is also surprising that they fail to understand that while the Southwest intelligently preferred Olu Falae in the 1999 presidential election, Olusegun Obasanjo enjoyed the better crossover appeal which propelled him into Aso Villa. More crucially, it must be understood that the seeming consensus that appeared to produce a Yoruba president in 1999 could not be divorced from the 1993 presidential election annulment. Such a consensus is unlikely to be built again, and each party and ethnic group will have to explore sensible and multipronged strategies to win the presidency.

    If the partial results already sanctioned by INEC are taken into cognisance, and given the way they are skewed against the APC candidate, it is hard to see Dr Ngige winning. If he loses, it will not be because he failed to run a credible and efficient campaign, or because the electorate didn’t vote for him. It will be because he ran against a manipulative and amoral federal government, an unscrupulous Governor Peter Obi who pays only lip service to democracy, a short-sighted and parochial elite anxious to protect imaginary boundaries, and an unconscionable public who can’t seem to understand the fuss over an unfair electoral process or the principle of fighting for and defending truth and justice.

    It is also quite remarkable that some of those who denounce the APC in the Anambra election and turn a blind eye to the corruption that accompanied it come from the Southwest. Their reasons are totally unrelated to the noxious details of the electoral manipulations observed in the Anambra poll by everyone. Indeed, the unusual Southwest support for injustice is merely a reflection of the divisions that have now become integral to Southwest politics, one in which everyone defines progressivism according to his taste and embraces it according to his whim. The bitter political struggle in the Southwest, which always spills over to other parts of the country, will continue for some time to come, for it has become burdensome and discomfiting for those who had associated with Obafemi Awolowo in the First and Second Republics, and long ago passed themselves off as progressives, to mollify the pangs and reproof of conscience triggered by their betrayal of democratic principles.

    Those who suggest that the Anambra debacle presages a catastrophic 2015 are right. The Anambra poll failed because there are fewer people today in the country with the character and principles that conduce to good electoral behaviour. Anambra has probably sealed its fate. But the buck-passers of INEC, the vicious and amoral presidency of Dr Jonathan, and the shallow and sentimental analysts crawling all over Nigeria with spurious logic will guarantee that this long-suffering country, not just Anambra, inexorably moves closer to meeting its fate in two years’ time.