The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Inec

  • INEC flouting tribunal order on inspection of election materials, says Akpabio

    Senator Godswill Akpabio of Akwa Ibom Northwest senatorial district has accused the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in the state of denying his legal team access to election materials.

    It could be recalled that the Chairman of the Election Petition

    Tribunal, Justice W.O Akanbi had on April 2 granted Senator Akpabio, the petitioner and applicant and his agents including forensic experts’ access to inspect and copy all electoral materials used in the Akwa Ibom Northeast senatorial election.

    However, counsel to SenatorAkpabio, Mr. Patrick Umoh disclosed that the INEC in the state has refused to obey the order of the tribunal to allow them inspect and copy the materials for litigation purposes.

    Umoh told our correspondent that it was obvious that the state

    Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC) of INEC, Mr. Mike Igini was colluding with the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) government in the state to frustrate the efforts of the legal team.

    Read also: INEC Chairman Yakubu: votes now count

    “We learnt that on the instruction of Igini, Akwa Ibom INEC has consistently flouted the order and has refused the agents of Senator

    Akpabio and forensic experts access to the election material. INEC has been engaging in a hide-and-seek game.

    “We also wish to inform you that we had earlier reported for the said inspection on Thursday, the 11thday of April, 2019, Friday, 12thApril, 2019 and Monday, 15thApril, 2019 but our efforts to have access to the materials and inspect same did not yield any positive result,” Umoh said.

    Akpabio’s lawyer said that the hide-and-seek by Igini may have been to tip off the PDP and give them sufficient time to oppose the move for the inspection of the election materials by forensic experts hired by Senator Akpabio.

    “INEC has colluded with PDP and advised the party to file a motion on April 16th which they cited as the reason they couldn’t allow the inspection of the materials as ordered by the court.

    “Analysts believe the hide-and-seek by INEC was to give the PDP enough time to file the motion,” he maintained.

    Head legal department of INEC in Akwa Ibom, Mr. MarkChukwu who spoke on the matter said it is not true that Akpabio’s legal team was denied access to electoral materials.

    Chukwu explained that the senator’s lawyers had met with the

    commission to allow them inspect and copy the materials which the commission quickly granted.

    He, however, said the inspection which was scheduled for 11am on Wednesday would have taken place but for Motion on Notice obtained from court and issued to INEC by one of the parties in the election.

    Chukwu further said that despite the Motion on Notice, the commission still went ahead to invite legal teams of all the political parties to come inside the strong room to inspect the materials.

    He, however, said the inspection was not possible because of the shabby arrangement of the materials, which needed the presence of Electoral Officers to help sort them out.

  • INEC Chairman Yakubu: votes now count

    Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Chairman Prof. Mahmood Yakubu yesterday insisted that with the nation’s electoral reforms in the last nine years, votes now count.

    According to him, politicians were becoming desperate to engage in malpractices because of their frustration by the new order.

    He, however, urged the government to prosecute sponsors of vote buying and selling and their agents, saying that vote buying and selling should be treated as criminal offences that should be punished.

    Yakubu spoke in Keffi, Nasarawa State at the “Anti-corruption policy dialogue on eradicating electoral corruption: Focus on vote buying”, which was organised by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).

    The INEC boss, whose address was read by a National Commissioner in-charge of Information and Voter Education, Festus Okoye said: “You can see that our elections are getting better and the politicians are getting more desperate. And these accounts for some of the challenges we have.

    “It is evident  that the innovations and improvements in our electoral processes since 2010 have somehow put a check on ballot box snatching, ballot box stuffing, multiple voting, or falsification of results, diversion of election materials, hijack of election personnel, falsification of election results and violations of the electoral laws have become considerably addressed.

    “As votes start to count, as the election are determined solely by the electoral votes, politicians now go directly to the polling units to induce the voters. And I say that the votes are beginning to count.”

    “Voter inducement before and after voting is manifested in two ways first is attempts by politicians and their agents to determine the choice of voters by offering them monetary or material rewards. Second is the attempt by prospective voters to demand such gratification in order to vote.”

    Yakubu added: “INEC is concerned about the impact of vote buying and vote selling on our democracy. Vote buying and selling is an illegal act. Sponsors of vote buying and selling must be brought to book and not only those that are given instructions to do so.

    “In response to these challenges, INEC has adopted the following measures: changing and enhancing the secrecy of votes through polling unit management and locating the voting unit boxes outside for the view of party agents and the voters.”

    On the laws to apply on offenders, he said: “The provisions of sections 124, 125 and 129, 1 and 130 of the Electoral Acts 2010 as amended provide us with clear indications of the illegality of vote buying and selling. “While section 124 stipulates offences relating to bribery and conspiracy, section 125 reinforces the requirements of secrecy in voting. Section 124 subsections 18 (d) and 13(a) simply spelt out what constitutes electoral offences and undue influence with specific reference to vote buying and selling. The punishments for contravening these provisions as stipulated in sections 129 and 130 respectively.

    “Beyond the provisions of the Electoral Act legal provisions due to bribery and corruption particularly the enabling Act of the ICPC. EFCC and FIRS, as well as the administration of justice Act makes voters’ inducement and vote buying a criminal act.”

    He said the dialogue should be the beginning of concerted efforts towards democratic consolidation.

    The INEC chair said: “You will recall that in my speech during the presentation of the certificate of return to the President-elect and the vice president-elect on the February 27, 2019, I emphasized the need for a national dialogue on various aspect of our electoral democracy.

    “Indeed, such a dialogue is required to nurture and sustain our democracy. And it is my hope that this dialogue will be the beginning of concerted efforts towards democratic consolidation in our dear country.”

    He, however, expressed regrets that vote inducement has become a global phenomenon.

    Yakubu said: “The use of inducement to gather votes is an old and recurring practice across the world. Such inducements which are often deployed to influence voters on how they vote range from money to material goods and defers from one country to another. Items such as vehicle parts, chairs, wrist watches, textile materials, shirts, buckets, cements, rice, and cooking oil are used for inducement.

    “Medications and mobile phones have become ready currencies in the transactional relationships that have developed between the voters and the political class.

    “In recent times, the use of money to induce voters or to buy votes especially within the vicinity of polling units has come under intense public scrutiny.

    “Agents of political parties now stand at strategic locations around our pulling units to see which party a voter has voted for either directly or through a picture of the marked ballot paper as evidence for payment.”

    The INEC boss noted that investigations show various that the use of inducement as a strategy of vote mobilisation is a global phenomenon.

    For example, 15 per cent of voters’ survey across Latin American from 2010 to 2012 and 16 per cent of voters in 33 African countries in 2016, acknowledged been offered money or some material goods in exchange for their votes.

    He said: “Here in Nigeria, 69 per cent of respondents acknowledged receiving money or items such as rice, Maggie cubes, shirts, plastic buckets and textile materials in exchange for their votes in two governorship elections in 2014 and 2015.”

    Read also: Court halts INEC conclusion on Imo North senatorial election

    “Indeed, in one of the governorship elections and other subsequent elections, such practices were referred to as stomach infrastructure. It has now become famous terminology in our political vocabulary. The way at which this act has undertaken has turned our polling unites into trading centers and market places for buying and selling of votes.”

    Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), Boss Mustapha said: “It is disheartening to know that vote buying and other forms of electoral corruption and violence in the last elections have cast doubts on the credibility and integrity of the country’s electioneering process.”

    The SGF, who was represented by the Permanent Secretary, General Services, Office of the SGF, Mr. Olusegun Adekunle said: “Hate speeches too, have become a tool for opponents to attack each other because of conflicting situation.

    “I feel very elated with the organisation of this dialogue because it is at fora like this that we are able to have useful engagements needed to build the consensus that is necessary for developing national and multi-stakeholder response required to tackle challenges like the vote buying phenomenon.

    “The Buhari Administration in 2017 approved and adopted the National Anti-Corruption Strategy (2017-2021) to strengthen the electoral process across the Federal, State and Local Government Levels to engender public confidence. The ultimate aim is to create a more credible electoral culture.”

    The ICPC Chairman, Prof. Bolaji Owasanoye, disclosed that in the next few years, the commission will be combining aggressive enforcement and prevention measures, with developing knowledge driven policies that would guide the long-term sustainability of the war against corruption in the country, including political corruption and vote buying.

    He said: “The lCPC looks forward to collaboration with INEC to intensify enforcement of provisions of the Electoral Act dealing with electoral offences. Only collaboration with INEC can remove the legal hamstring such as is found in section 149 and 150 of the Electoral Act.”

    The Acting Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ibrahim Magu, who was represented by his Secretary, Olukayode Olanipekun, vows to always work with security operatives and the ICPC in the battle to stamp out vote buying and selling.

  • Court halts INEC conclusion on Imo North senatorial election

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has been forced to delay decision on Imo North senatorial election.

    According to a statement signed by Mohammed Haruna, National Commissioner and Member, information and Voter Education Committee, the commission committee that reviewed the election has concluded work.

    However, the ex parte order served on the commission, according to Haruna has placed an embargo on further action on the matter.

    Senator Benjamin Uwajumogu. the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate had instituted the case against INEC a day after it set up Committee.

    Hearing on the matter has been adjourned to 30′ April 20l9.

    Read also: Tribunal: INEC allay fears of petitioners

    The statement reads: “Further to our statement of 4′ April 20l9 on the setting up of a Committee by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to investigate the veracity or otherwise of allegations of misconduct in the Imo North Senatorial election, the Commission wishes to inform the public that the Committee has completed its assignment.

    “However the Commission has been served with an ex parte order halting further action on the matter.

    “The order. issued by the Federal High Court Abuja on 9* April 20l9. specifically ordered the Commission to stay “ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS AND ACTIONS by the Respondent (INEC) pertaining. relating or connected with the declaration of [mo North Senatorial District election results of 23*

    “February and 9 March 2019, pending the determination of the application for prohibition”.

    “The case. which was instituted by Senator Benjamin Uwajumogu. the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate against INEC a day after it set up Committee. has been adjourned to 30′ April 20l9 for hearing. “

  • Facts and lies collide

    It’s true that facts don’t lie. But it looks like the website called www. factsdontlieng.com lied concerning the votes Atiku Abubakar, the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) candidate, polled in the February 23 presidential election. In his petition to the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, Atiku claimed he won the election based on results obtained from the website.

    But the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), in its response, said “the website described as www.factsdontlieng. com was neither created nor owned” by it.  INEC added that it “does not share information with such an unclassified entity.” The commission also said “any information purportedly derived there from which does not accord with the result as declared by INEC is not authentic but rather was invented for the purpose of this case.”

    Contrary to Atiku’s claim that he polled 18,356,732 votes  in the presidential election,  INEC’s  Director,  Information and Communications Technology, Chidi Nwafor, said President Muhammadu Buhari, the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate,  “was duly elected by majority of the lawful votes cast at the presidential election and scored at least one-quarter of the lawful votes cast at the election in 33 states and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, more than two-third of all the states of the federation and the Federal Capital Territory.”

    Nwafor added that Atiku “did not win the majority of the lawful votes cast and did not satisfy the mandatory constitutional requirement to be declared winner having polled 11,262,978 and one quarter of all lawful votes cast in 29 states and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja” as against Buhari “who scored 15,191,847 votes cast and one quarter of the lawful votes cast in 33 states and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja.”

    It’s clear that Atiku and INEC are not on the same page. It’s unclear how the said factsdontlieng.com got its own version of the presidential election result. It’s also unclear why Atiku chose to rely on the website for the presidential election result.  Who runs factsdontlieng.com?  Where did the website get its figures from? Can the website prove that its version of the presidential election result is authentic?  Why does Atiku believe the website is more believable than INEC?

    It’s true that lies aren’t facts. In this case, facts and lies collide. When there is such a collision, lies die first.  Facts will always win in a clash with lies. It remains to be seen whether Atiku can prove that factsdontlieng.com is more credible than INEC.

  • Tribunal: INEC allay fears of petitioners

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has allayed the fears of petitioners in the just concluded 2019 general elections concerning the private solicitors the commission has engaged to defend it at the election Tribunal.

    The commission noted that  External Solicitors engaged by the Commission for the prosecution of pre- and post-election matters are guided by the Commissions Code of Conduct for External Solicitors.

    INEC who was reacting to a statement credited Senator Shehu Sani that the commission hired private solicitors tondefend its cases urged all persons and individuals to have faith in the Commission and accord the Commission the necessary cooperation to deliver on its mandate.

    According to Mr. Festus Okoye, National Commissioner in charge of Information and Voter Education the commission is a law-abiding institution.

    “The Independent National Electoral Commission has a list of External Solicitors that it engages for the prosecution of pre and post-election matters. These solicitors are based in different parts of the country and must have represented a variety of clients and interests in the past.

    Read also: PDP protests INEC’s refusal to release electoral materials

    “However, the External Solicitors engaged by the Commission for the prosecution of pre- and post-election matters are guided by the Commissions Code of Conduct for External Solicitors. In selecting External Solicitors, the Commission is guided by the highest standard of ethics in recommending solicitors to represent it.

    “The Petition in this matter was filed by Distinguished Senator Shehu Sani against the election of Uba Sani. The Governor of Kaduna State did not contest the senatorial election in Kaduna State and could not have been the major consideration and issue in the assignment of cases to external solicitors. The Governor of Kaduna State is not a respondent or party in the Petition and the Commission has no reason to believe that the solicitor appointed by the Commission will subvert the cause of justice.

    “The External Solicitor appointed by the Commission is obligated to defend the election conducted by the Commission and the Declaration and Return made thereafter. The Commission will put forward the facts at its disposal and allow the Tribunal to adjudicate on the issues. The present Commission has been upfront in the provision of documents to all the political parties engaged in election petitions and will continue to do so.

    “The Commission is a responsible institution and a public trust and is not and will not be in any illicit liaison with any individual or group to subvert the cause of justice.

    “We urge all persons and individuals to have faith in the Commission and accord the Commission the necessary cooperation to deliver on its mandate. ”

    Besides, Okoye also noted that as a law-abiding institution, it will not be arguing in the media on petitions that are already before the Tribunal l.

    Festus who was speaking on petition pertaining to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) stated, “The Commission is a law-abiding institution and will not argue or canvass in the media, petitions that are sub-judice and where the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal is firmly seized of the issues.”

    He stressed that “the Lawyers representing the Petitioners are seized of the state of the law and the course to take if they truly believe that the Commission is in disobedience of the orders of the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal.

     

  • PDP protests INEC’s refusal to release electoral materials

    The People’s Democratic Party (PDP) has protested the alleged refusal by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to release election materials used for the February 23 presidential election, as ordered by the Court of Appeal.

    In a statement Monday by the spokesman for the PDP, Kola Ologbondiyan, the party cautioned INEC chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, not to plunge the nation into a monumental crisis.

    The main opposition party said INEC, by this action, is blatantly standing in the way of justice and working against the will of the people in their quest to salvage the nation and reclaim their “stolen mandate” at the tribunal.

    “The continued refusal of INEC to release the electoral materials to the PDP and our legal team is completely provocative and shows that the commission is working in cahoots with the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Buhari Presidency to frustrate the PDP, our candidate, Atiku Abubakar, and majority of Nigerians from retrieving our mandate at the tribunal.

    “INEC and the APC are apprehensive that the materials, particularly the forms EC8D and EC40G covering the nation in addition to the report of the Smart Card Readers used in the presidential election will show at the tribunal that the PDP and Atiku Abubakar clearly won the presidential election.

    “The PDP has been reliably informed of how the APC and some compromised top officials of INEC have been boasting that they will never allow these materials and documents to be released to the PDP legal team”, the statement added.

    The PDP dismissed claims by the APC and INEC that forms EC8D, EC40G and reports from the Smart Card Readers were not specifically captured in the said order of the court.

    Read also: PDP wins Rivers supplementary elections

    The party, however, insisted that the court was unequivocal in its order that all materials used for the election be made available to the PDP legal team.

    “For the avoidance of doubt, the Court of Appeal, among other orders, directed INEC to release and allow our legal team to inspect, scan, forensically audit and make copies of forms EC4OA, EC8A, EC8AVP, EC8B, EC8C, EC8E and all other electoral forms and materials including, but not limited to ballot papers and voters registers and materials used for the conduct of the presidential election, held across Nigeria on the 23rd of February, 2019, for the purpose of instituting and maintaining an election petition,” the party said.

    It noted that the refusal of INEC to release forms EC8D, EC40G and the reports of the card readers was a deliberate and vicious disobedience to the orders of the court for which the management of INEC should be charged for contempt.

    The party called on Nigerians to note that INEC, having allegedly rigged the election in favour of APC, is now seeking ways to frustrate its petition at the tribunal.

    “We therefore charge INEC, having been exposed, to end its shenanigan and release these documents without further delay,” the PDP concluded.

  • INEC: Atiku spreading fake election results

    Claims by Alhaji Atiku  Abubakar that he won the February 23 presidential election with 18,356,732 votes are nothing short of an invention, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has declared.

    The Commission also says it never transmitted results of the presidential election through any server and any figures purportedly obtained thereof are fake.

    It disowns the website, factsdontlie.com, which Atiku alleged before the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal as the source of the election results he claimed to have won.

    Responding to Atiku’s petition point by point, the commission said that contrary to the claim by the PDP and Abubakar, it owns no server and never transmitted any results through electronic server.

    In the counterclaims seen yesterday by The Nation, INEC said “With particular response to the issue of server and electronic transmission and collation repeatedly referred to by the petitioners, as at date, there is no legal framework in place for electronic voting, transmission and collation of scores or results of the electioneering process.

    “The Smart Card Reader till date was used for authenticating registered voters not for sorting, counting, transmission or collation as these processes are still manually done, given the state of the law.

    “The 1st respondent (INEC) has no server that contains the purported results the petitioners are claiming they got from a purported server.

    “In spite of the scheme at the time, counting, sorting, transmission and collation of votes during the 2019 general elections and the presidential election in particular were all done manually and not electronically.

    “The purported figure of 37,668,305 being bandied  by the petitioners as  the actual number of accredited voters is unknown to the 1st respondent and never existed in its record.”

    It specifically denied the existence of electronic transmission of results as it is unknown to the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended) and Regulations and Guidelines for the conduct of the elections 2019.

    INEC faulted the petitioners’ claim that the results of the election were transmitted electronically.

    Read also: APC’s claim on my birth is ridiculous, pedestrian, says Atiku

    In a witness statement attached to the INEC claims, the commission’s Director,  Information and Communications Technology, Chidi Nwafor denied all the petitioners’  claim about a server and branded it as false  “as I know as a fact that the 2nd respondent (President Muhammadu Buhari) was duly elected by majority of the lawful votes cast at the presidential election and scored at least one-quarter of the lawful votes cast at the election in 33 states and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, more than two-third of all the states of the federation and the Federal Capital Territory.”

    Witness added:”The petitioners did not win the majority of the lawful votes cast and did not satisfy the mandatory constitutional requirement to be declared winner having polled 11,262,978 and one quarter of all lawful votes cast in 29 states and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja as against the 2nd respondent who scored 15,191,847 votes cast and one quarter of the lawful votes cast in 33 states and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja.

    “The lawful and recognised computation of results is manually done using Electoral Form EC8 series and not the table pleaded by the petitioners given that the said table is not the result collated and declared by the 1st respondent.

    “I know as a fact that the details contained in the table in the paragraph 22 of the petition are inaccurate.

    “I know that mode of transmitting/collating election results is manual, using Forms EC8As, EC8Bs, EC8Cs and EC8Ds and not electronically done.

    “I know that the Manual Technologies 2019 and demonstration videos referred to in paragraph 27 are internal training materials.”

    The commission also said: “Further to the foregoing, the website described as www.factsdontlieng.com was neither created nor owned by the 1st Respondent (INEC). It is a site not known to the 1st Respondent.

    “The 1st Respondent does not share information with such an unclassified entity and any information purportedly derived there from which does not accord with the result as declared by the 1st Respondent is not authentic but rather was invented for the purpose of this case.”

    INEC ‘satisfied’ by Buhari’s academic qualification

    The Commission also said it is satisfied with the academic documents submitted by Buhari for the purpose of the election

    Atiku is claiming in his petition that one of the schools Buhari claimed to have attended could not be traced and that  Buhari claimed to hold a certificate that was not in existence at the time he claimed to have obtained it.

    But INEC said it had no query over  Buhari’s academic documents.

    The Commission said it was “satisfied with the educational qualification presented” by the president to run for the election.

    INEC’s   lawyer, Yunus Ustaz (SAN) brands Atiku’s petition as frivolous, incompetent and/or lacking in merit.

    He prays the tribunal to dismiss the petition.

    It plans to call 83 witnesses in its defence.

     

  • INEC delegation visits family of late ad hoc staff in Rivers

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) said its delegation had paid a condolence visit to the family of the late Miss Ibisaki Amachree.

    Amachree, an INEC ad hoc staff was shot and killed during the Feb. 23 Presidential Election in Rivers.

    The Commission in a notice on its official facebook page on Saturday,  said that the delegation was led by the Electoral Officer, Degema LGA, Mr Patrick Uzoka.

    The visit took place a few days after the unfortunate incident.

    Read also: Polls: INEC chair, IGP, others blame politicians for violence, malpractices

    It noted that Uzoka commiserated with and presented a token to her family on behalf of the Commission.

    It disclosed that Uzoka was accompanied by the Head, Servicom, Mr Augustine Okogbule.

    Amachree, was reported to have been hit by a bullet while returning from election duty in Degema.

    She was buried on Saturday, March 30 at the Port Harcourt cemetery.(NAN)

  • Rivers APC Primaries, INEC and Supreme Court uncertainty

    In this piece, Kenneth Atavti examines the discord in the Rivers State All Progressives Congress (APC) and the danger of relying on litigation, instead of seeking political solutions to intra-party conflicts.

    Although the 2019 general elections in Rivers State have come and gone, the controversy surrounding the disqualification of the All Progressives Congress (APC) from fielding any candidates at the elections shows no sign of abating.

    In an unprecedented decision, on 7 January 2019, Hon. Justice Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Port Harcourt Division, delivered a judgment (in a suit instituted by Senator Magnus Abe) barring the APC in Rivers State from fielding any candidates at any level for the 2019 general elections and restraining INEC from accepting or presenting the names of any APC candidate for the elections.

    The court based this decision on the failure of the APC to conduct valid primaries “in accordance with due process”, particularly because the primaries were conducted during the pendency of a suit on the same issue and the existence of a ruling barring the APC from fielding candidates delivered by Hon. Justice C. Nwogu of the Rivers State High Court.

    The Court of Appeal, Port Harcourt Division, subsequently granted an order of stay of execution against the judgment of the Federal High Court, with the Hon. Justice A. Gumel who delivered the lead judgment declaring that: “And by this ruling today, APC in Rivers State and their candidates are free to participate in the elections.

    They can go about their campaigns, go about everything that is lawful to ensure that they are on the ballot and that INEC should ensure that their names get back to the list.”

    Shortly thereafter, the Court of Appeal upturned the decision of the High Court of Rivers State and affirmed the right of the APC to field candidates at the elections. This ruling of the Court of Appeal was later set aside by the Supreme Court which invoked its original jurisdiction under Section 22 of the Supreme Court Act. This, in effect, meant that the judgment of the Federal High Court remained valid, binding and subsisting against the APC in Rivers State.

    In what may be described as delivering a final and mortal blow to the APC’s chances at the general elections in Rivers State, in February 2019 the Supreme Court dismissed a separate Appeal filed by the faction of the APC in Rivers State loyal to the Minister of Transportation, Rotimi Amaechi, as well three other Appeals filed by the APC, Ojukaye Flag-Amachree and Tonye Patrick Cole on the grounds that they were statute-barred, having been filed outside the time allowed under Section 285(9) and

    (12) of the Constitution (4th Alteration Act). On the basis of these decisions of the apex court, INEC excluded all candidates of the APC in Rivers State from the ballot.

    To many keen watchers of Rivers State politics, the decisions of the Supreme Court upholding the decisions of the Federal High Court and the High Court of Rivers State barring the APC from fielding candidates had finally and completely disposed of the controversy surrounding the subject.

    Indeed, many had taken the matter as conclusively settled, given the fact that the apex Court had finally pronounced on the matter. For these persons, the subsequent announcement of fresh dates for the hearing of four appeals filed by Senator Magnus Abe, Tonye Cole and the APC at the Supreme Court would have come as a rude shock indeed.

    These appeals ostensibly arose from various suits instituted by members of the heavily-factionalised Rivers State APC seeking an interpretation as to whether valid primaries held, and if so, which faction of the party is to be recognised as having the right to present candidates.

    The Supreme Court has now fixed April 8 and 11 2019 for the hearing of these appeals.

    Ordinarily, the pendency of these Appeals ought not to evoke any worry or controversy, given the prior repeated affirmation by the Supreme Court of the decision of the Federal High Court and the High Court of Rivers State which both held that the Rivers APC could not validly nominate candidates for the 2019 general elections. It ought to be predictable that the Supreme Court will stand firm on its own established precedents.

    It is to be noted that none of the appellants currently before the Court has formally invited the Supreme Court to reverse its position as expressed in its preceding decisions on the Rivers APC debacle. This is crucial because unless this procedure is invoked, upon which the Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria will be obligated to empanel a full constitutional panel of seven Justices of the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court will have not the jurisdiction to reverse an earlier decision [ADEGOKE MOTORS LTD V ADESANYA;

    Unreported Decision of the Supreme Court in SC 186/1988 delivered on 19th May 1989].

    Thus, the current panel slated to hear the Appeals fixed for April 8 and 11th 2019 cannot possibly wield any jurisdiction to reach a contrary position on the matter.

    Again, legal commentators have expressed concern over the hearing of these appeals after the conduct of elections and the announcement of a winner. The reasoning appears to be that because INEC has proceeded to conduct elections in Rivers State, any dispute or legal question that might affect the outcome of that process is no longer within the purview of the Supreme Court or any other conventional Court, but falls exclusively within the jurisdiction of the election petition tribunals.

    This appears particularly important when it is considered that a decision of the Supreme Court which has the effect of nullifying the elections already conducted may be tantamount to a situation where the apex court has usurped the functions and powers of election petition tribunals.

    Already, the law is clear that election petition tribunals can nullify elections on the ground of the improper exclusion of a validly nominated candidate.

    Still another hurdle for the Supreme Court to cross, should it be inclined to reverse its prior decisions, is the fact that about 91 political parties which participated in the elections in Rivers State at several levels have not been joined to the appeals currently pending before the Supreme Court.

    Thus, the question that seeks an answer is whether the apex Court can proceed to make a decision affecting the interests of these 91 political parties in their absence. The unanimous position of legal practitioners interviewed in the course of this article is that the law frowns at such a situation.

    According to one, “you cannot shave a man’s head in his absence.”

    Finally, from a study of the appellants’ processes, it is apparent that the various appeals seek orders as to whether primaries held or, if they did, what faction’s primaries is to be recognised.

    None of these appeals seek any order nullifying the elections in River State- precisely because the elections were not in contemplation.

    It is elementary law that a court cannot grant reliefs not sought of it. The question again arises: what will be the effect of a Supreme Court decision which effectively nullifies the election, even though it has not been prayed to do so and given the fact that it is the election petition tribunal that has the jurisdiction to do so?

    As all eyes now focus on the Supreme Court, it remains to be seen what course a Court still reeling from the effect of its greatest upheaval in decades would chart going forward, particularly in politically-charged cases.

    However, what seems to be clear is that the Rivers APC case may indeed prove to be the litmus test for assessing the direction and legacy of the Acting CJN and the entire court in the foreseeable future.

  • ‘INEC was unfair to Rivers State’

    Rivers State All Progressives Congress (APC) chieftain and spokesman for the Tony Cole Campaign Organisation Prince Tonye Princewill spoke with reporters in Lagos on the outcome of the general elections and the future of the party in the Southsouth state. Excerpts:

    What is your reaction to the outcome of the Rivers State governorship election?

    What has happened teaches me a lot of things. Some Nigerians do not care enough about our corruption. At least, not enough to call a spade a spade when they see it. We all know what transpired, even if we don’t know the details. Yet, we put it down to how things are, in Nigeria, in Rivers State. Many Nigerians do not care about how you win, as long as you win. You can kill and maim your way to power and it won’t matter to them, they will gladly shake the bloodstained hands of the winner and bow down in loyalty. Our moral compasses have so ossified to the point where winning is more important than how you win. The outrage over what led to INEC’s declaration is shared by many, but not enough. Some of us have elected to do something about it. All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing isn’t a cliche for us.

    Your party, the APC, did not participate. But, it adopted the AAC candidate. The result shows Wike winning the combined forces of the APC and AAC with over 700,000 votes. What is your reaction?

    There is no correlation between that result and Rivers people. Unless it is in the minds of the ignorant or the complicit. If like some, you believe that the end justifies the means, it is convenient to disregard how that result was arrived at. But those who know better aren’t fooled. You say 700,000 votes, yet you ignore that one LGA, Wike’s own accounts for over 300,000 votes unchallenged after he stormed its collation center where a soldier was shot, yet another was injured critically by a machete and AAC agents taken hostage while electoral materials where carted away. An LGA where such occurred really had no business being accepted by INEC. But it was. Hook, line and with 300,000 votes. The list of high crimes by INEC and PDP continued across the other LGAs, but the APC Government let it be. If we the people had them taken matters into our own hands, people would have died and the neutral observer would have said we in Rivers state are savages. But they forget that you can only push a man so far. I don’t blame Wike, it’s his nature. I blame his accomplices. Wike already has what is coming to him, but they too must answer to this show of shame. They cannot escape it. Never.

    This election was held on March 9 and it took 24 days to fully collate and announce the result. Is that normal?

    Thank you for that question. It isn’t normal. And yet some expect a normal result to emerge from such an abnormal process? Like I said earlier, our moral compasses have been so redacted to the point where we can not call a spade what it is. INEC suspended a whole election in an entire state against the provisions of an electoral act and it stood. Our cries were dismissed and our voices ignored. Nobody listened. Amaechi is one man. If PDP and internal saboteurs cannot forgive him, should the entire state be made to suffer? Do our elders and youths have to be subjected to a Wike administration for another four years because of your hate for Amaechi? What did he do to you? What did we do to you? Every life in Rivers state is valuable and we will not rest until they are given the opportunity to realize their full potential. Some of the people lining up to stab Amaechi today were the beneficiaries of his good heart yesterday. In some cases, he even saved their lives!! Disagree, even deny him any advantage if you like, but don’t forget tomorrow, even if you have forgotten yesterday. Why demonize him constantly even when he is silent? What use is it to you to kick a man when others are kicking him too and why take out your pound of flesh from the backs of innocent Rivers people? Amaechi will forgive you. But Rivers people won’t.

    You raise several objections like that the result should have been announced within 21 days, that INEC kept result shhets in its custody rather than with the CBN. What difference does this make?

    The simple answer to your question is our objections made no difference because they interrupted the agenda that was in play. There is a reason why elections are covered by guidelines and transparency is the currency which INEC has to protect. In the Rivers state matter, they exhibited an arrogance of the highest order and made no concessions in our favour. None. The blatant disregard they showed is why we cannot let this matter rest. In a very short statement I issued after they declared Wike, I said they have murdered sleep and asked us to go to hell. We have heard them. They too will hear us soon.

    You issued a statement after the return of Wike that the election will not stand the test of time. How, what will you do?

    We have several options before us and each option will be scrutinised to the full. If this isn’t countered, it will become the norm. By our traditionally low standards, 2019 in Rivers state was a very new low. Therefore there must be consequences. You can ignore a small party and maybe get away with it, but not the APC. My saying after the selection and declaration was “Fiat justitia ruat caelum” and I stand by it. Rivers state deserves better than such an organized oppression. We are way too big for that.

    You have severally accused Senator Magnus Abe, who was factional governorship candidate of APC of fraternizing with Wike. How did he do that?

    Let me quickly correct you. Abe was an aspirant, not a candidate. And the APC only recognized Tonye Cole as its candidate. So the use of the term factional candidate is like calling someone a factional parent. It won’t fly. I’m not going to discuss Abe at length except to say that when the baby is not your own, it’s death does not affect you. We saw it in the Bible when Solomon confronted the two women over the ownership of the child. We know those who are happy about this hollow victory and we know those who avoided bloodshed to allow it pass. The real owners of Rivers state are in tears. The real friends of Rivers state are sad. The real lovers of Rivers state are in mourning, while those without a stake or conscience are either indifferent or at peace. Let every man take his position. The time to be held accountable will definitely come.