The spurious declaration of the presidential candidate of the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC as the winner of 2023 presidential election has again put the Nigerian judiciary on trial even as the declaration has slurred the image of the country because of the political baggage of the alleged winner of the election as committee of nations have started treating the country as pariah even before he is sworn-in
By Miracle Egbo
The tone of what would shape the administration of Bola Ahmed Tinubu if sworn-in as the President of Nigeria in May 29, 2023 appears to have found expression in the way and manner the United States of America government has viewed the victory of Tinubu at the poll. As at the time of filing this report, USA has ignored sending congratulatory message to the President-elect, Tinubu because the victory is laced with disturbing irregularities that questioned the legitimacy of his victory. Beyond the legitimacy issue that has tarred the image of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC with toxic fraud, the Nigerian judiciary is on a serious trial as the justices of both the Appeal Court and Supreme Court are getting set to adjudicate on the petitions brought to them by the Labour Party , LP and Peoples Democratic Party, PDP. It was gathered that the pariah status wrought on the country by INEC because of the fraud-infested election it conducted recently appears to be gathering momentum. The USA through her President, Joe Biden has refused to congratulate the president –elect because the process that threw him up is viewed by that country to have been tarred with brush of fraud. For instance, the Vice President of USA, Kamala Harris had visited Ghana, Tanzania and Zimbabwe to rally the business community in those countries thereby deepening the fear that the pariah status on the country is actually gathering momentum, and very soon other countries might join the cue of ignoring the country in the schemes of things in the comity of nations.
Intelligence at the disposal of this medium revealed that the petitions filed at the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal – Appeal Court – have the potential of reversing whatever decisions made by the electoral umpire. Many political pundits have argued that the grounds of the petitions of both the presidential candidate of, LP, Peter Gregory Obi and the presidential candidate of PDP, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar are damaging to be ignored. In spite the good cases of the duo at the tribunal, joy killers are wont to argue that the grounds on which Tinubu is not qualified to be declared the president-elect of the most African populous country, Nigeria are faulty. Those in this divided have cited many miscarriages of justices since the nascent democracy and came to the conclusion that in the judiciary what is often obtainable is that in most cases, judgment is seen to be given instead of justice.
Supreme Court Perceived Miscarriage Of Justice
Facts scooped by Tentacle revealed that the previous cases of this nature handled before by the Supreme Court, had the trappings of judgment instead of justice. The question on the lips of respondents who spoke to this medium is, would the Appeal Court and the apex court be able to kick the can down the road in the course of deciding the petitions filed at the presidential election by the duo of Obi and Atiku to challenge the toxic victory given to Tinubu by Professor Mahmood Yakubu, National Chairman of INEC? According to respondents the previous judgment by the apex court left soured grape in the mouths of the electorate who cried miscarriage of justice.
In Imo State when governorship election was held in 2019 and INEC declared Emeka Ihedioha as the winner of the election, Hope Uzodinma who came fourth in that contest as decreed by the electorate of Imo extraction, felt cheated and headed to court to challenge the outcome of the election. The case went through the tribunal, Appeal Court where he was trounced but not dejected he headed to the apex court to challenge the siding of the court with the wishes of the people. Oops the apex court granted the current governor of Imo State his toxic demand of governing the state without the support of the people. That singular judgment of the apex court in the case of Imo State has allegedly turned the state into a huge killing field because analysts are of the opinion that the imposition of Uzodinma by the court has bruised the voice of the people on who should be their ruler and there are consequences. Information has it that no matter how hard the Uzodinma administration tries to impose itself on the consciousness of the Imo voters, the more the ebbing of the credibility of the administration.
The same scenario played out in Bayelsa State where APC was said to have won the election as declared by INEC but the irregularities on the credentials of the running mate of the APC candidate made the party to lose the mandate to PDP. Supreme Court gave the mandate to Douye Diri who is the incumbent governor of the state, again jettisoning the wishes of the electorate who voted in the 2019 governorship race in the state.
More disturbing is the judgment procured by the Senators-elects, Godswill Akpabio, Ahmed Lawan and David Umahi. During the senatorial primary in their political party they contested as presidential candidate of their party. Immediately after the primary the trio arm twisted APC and forced the party to set aside the primary that has produced candidates for the various senatorial seats to accommodate their candidature, a move that was challenged in the court of competent jurisdiction and their eligibilities were invalidated but the apex court. Supreme Court in what many have described as travesty of justice gave mandate to these senators. Some analysts are of the opinion that the apex court by that judgment like in others have invalidated the voice of the people in who represents them at the National Assembly, situation they said is injurious to democracy.
Undeterred by the misgivings that trailed the dispense of judgment instead of justice, the presidential candidates on the platforms of LP and PDP had in their petitions raised a number of issues that are capable of setting aside the pronouncement of Yakubu to declare Tinubu as the winner of the presidential election. The duo insisted among other things that if the judiciary allows the Yakubu declaration to stand, it would amount to rape of the democracy and shall further erode the confidence of the electorate on the democratic process in the country. Reasoned Professor Chidi Odinkalu, a professor of law, the democratic process has been shifted to the law court, the populace is waiting to see if the judiciary would inspire confidence in the electorate by addressing the rape of democracy and the constitution of the country by the declaration of Yakubu who defied the dictates of the constitution as it affects who is qualified to be declared the winner of presidential election in the country.
Infractions That May Bury Tinubu’s Victory
Facts at the disposal of this medium revealed that there is a subsisting apex court judgment which gave state status to the Federal Capital Territory, FCT, and as such Yakubu erred on the side of the law when he ignored the fact that the person he declared as the winner did not meet the statutory requirement which is scoring 25 per cent of the votes cast in the FCT during the 2023 presidential election. Sources said that buoyed by the apex court’s judgment on the status of FCT, the indigenes of FCT had approached a Federal High Court to declare FCT a state with full complements of state, praying the court to order INEC to conduct governorship and state Assembly elections in the capital city of the country without further delay for the sake of equity and fairness. Pros and cons of the state status of FCT have not been able to fault the decision of the apex court in no distant judgment extending state status to the capital city, and it further strengthened the resolve of the petitioners at the Presidential Election Tribunal that Tinubu does not deserve to be declare the winner of the presidential election because of his failure to secure the required 25 per cent of the votes cast in the capital city during the presidential election.
Another infraction by the President-elect is the fact that his running mate Kassim Shetima in the election had won the primary to be a senatorial candidate of his party as at the time he contested for Vice President. He never resigned as Senatorial candidate before the contest, an action which compromised the constitutional provision in this regard. Analysts are of the opinion that such action is enough for the victory of the president-elect to be nullified because the constitution has been compromised. Another germane issue that was violated by Tinubu is making available his minimum credentials for scrutiny. In INEC Form, the EC8 where he was supposed to record his primary and secondary school qualifications was vacant because of his failure to avail INEC his primary and secondary school credentials. Even the University certificate presented by Tinubu to INEC has disturbing issues, for instance, the name on the transcript of the University of Chicago is at variance with the name he bears. According to Chicago University documents scooped by this medium, the name in the certificate issued by the institution is that of a woman instead of a man. In the same vein the name and location of the primary and secondary schools that Tinubu attended is in the realm of guess. The names of the primary and secondary schools that he claimed that he attended is not in existence and even where the school exists, name of Tinubu was not recorded anywhere in the files of the school he claimed to have attended. Based on these findings, analysts conclude that INEC and security operatives should not have cleared him to contest the election in the first place.
An informed source revealed that 10 years ago a court of competent jurisdiction found Tinubu wanting in the drug related offences in the United States of America. The court was said to have given him an option of the forfeiture of a whopping $460,000 proceeds from the narcotic trade which he was involved or risk going to jail. Information emanating from the court that found him wanting revealed that Tinubu offered to forfeit the money to let himself off the hook and since then had not visited USA. An informed source insisted that Tinubu is allegedly having link with the drug cartel in the world. According to the source, Alpha Beta, a tax consulting firm which Tinubu had a substantial share in the recent past allegedly paid money to drug cartel said to be based in Paris, and had over the years oiled the relationship he allegedly had with the narcotic cartel across the globe. The suspicious wealth of Tinubu since he left office as the governor of Lagos State had fueled believe that his intimidating wealth might not be unconnected with his alleged romance with narcotic cartels across the globe.
As the petition against Tinubu’s victory is waiting response at the presidential election tribunal, the strongman of Lagos politics was said to have been engaged in meeting which suggests panic. Tinubu who is currently on sick leave in Paris was said to have allegedly had meeting with the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Olukayode Ariwola to among other things discuss the best possible ways to frustrate the petitions against his declaration as the winner of the presidential election. Judiciary analysts averred that the alleged meeting is capable of inflicting massive judiciary wounds on the petition filed by the aggrieved parties in this regard, a trend they said is inimical to the deepening of democracy because the alleged meeting amounts to abortion of justice. It was gathered that Tinubu had a brief stint in London because of the alleged meeting before he headed to Paris to take care of his ill-health.
Since the conduct of the February 25, 2023 presidential election, the foreign election observers had in one voice dismissed the processes that threw up Tinubu’s awaiting presidency as a charade, adding that the presidential election had the trappings of fraud. The observers advised that INEC should as a matter of urgency review the election with a view of reflecting the wishes of the electorate at the poll. The foreign observers are livid with anger because of the way and manner INEC conducted the presidential election. Foreign media had been awash with editorial condemning the outcome of the conduct of the 2023 presidential election. The Economist of London in an editorial described the election as shambolic which does not reflect the wishes of the electorate at the poll, adding that INEC should not hesitate to redeem its image by reflecting the wishes of the voters without further delay. The Washington Post in its editorial acknowledged that the election is a departure from the old order but the process was badly managed by the electoral umpire in the country, urging the body to do the needful by making sure that the wishes of the voters are uphold by announcing the real winner of the election. Cable Network News, CNN and Aljazeera in their various broadcast had pooh-poohed the process that threw up Tinubu as president-elect, insisting that fraud massively characterized the process, and should be condemned. Time magazine in its report dismissed the process as charade that cannot stand the test of time, adding that the process had eroded whatever ground democracy had garnered in the country for the past 24 years.
Expectations of Nigerians from the Judiciary
An average Nigerian may have lost confidence with the judiciary what with the suspicious judgment it had delivered concerning elections conducted in the past. Those judgment had further eroded the confidence that the judiciary is the last hope of common man. The electorate whose mandate were wrongly given are calling on the judiciary to restore the confidence of the electorate in it by making sure that the mandate of the people stolen on February 25, 2023 is restored to the rightful owner real time. Nigerians are of the opinion that for the judiciary not to be gaslighted, it should as matter of urgency broadcast the trial of the petitions at the tribunal real time. In the same vein, the electorates are expectant that the real results of the presidential election would be called by the judiciary and the actual winner is installed. Anything short of these expectations would further ruin the image of the judiciary and impact negatively on the democratic values of elections in the country.
