An interesting, albeit intriguing aspect of the 2023 Presidential Election is the aftermath of the scores of the candidates, Inecs declaration of the results, its pleading in the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, the unfolding antics of mischief makers and the cacophony of opinions canvassed by various individuals vis a vis the constitutional mandates.
An ingrained and peremptory jural threshold of the highest pedestal is the Constitutional impetus consecrated by Section 134 (2) (a) and (b) which directs that “a candidate to the office of the President shall be DEEMED to have been duly elected where there being there being more than two candidates for the election he has the highest number of votes cast at the election and has not less than one quarter of the votes cast at the election in each of at least two thirds of all the States in the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory”
During the now convoluted and controversial declaration of results, the electoral umpire announced the following as results of the Presidential Election for Abuja Federal Capital Territory (FCT) ……..
The Labour Party Presidential Candidate Mr Peter Obi, a valiant and veteran, if not unpretentiously ardent advocate of due process duly and pertinently raised substantial infractions and blemishes of the Electoral Act and the Constitution but was derisively and mischievously taunted to “go to court”, a hackneyed errant pastime of contemporary routine deviants.
Here comes Mr Peter Obi and the extant Presidential Election Petition.
Nigerians are aware of the various opinions canvassed on this issue simple but now vexed issue of the application of Section 134 (2) (a) and (b) of the 1999 Constitution. Those learned in law and laymen, assumed analysts and officious bigots and bystanders, patriots and pretenders, friends,foes and fiends alike were all present at the venues and tables of discussion.
Some commentators were impelled by conscientious inclinations to choose the harder right while others genuflected and gravitated towards the easier wrong.
But INEC, apparently guided and circumscribed by a settled and binding judicial pronouncement of the apex court in the historic case of BUHARI VS OBASANJO wholesomely and pertinently opted to plead in defense of the true position of the Constitution in her reply to the Election Petition filed by H E Peter Obi.
To contextually situate this write up, it is with due deference, deemed apostle to capture the relevant pleadings of H E PETER OBI vis a vis the reply of INEC on this issue. The reason is commonplace: by pleadings, parties define and delineate their issues which would be binding on them and the tribunal.
In Paragraph 81 of Mr Peter Obi’s petition it was averred “a candidate shall be declared a winner only if he scores the highest number of votes cast at the election and he has not less than one quarter of the votes cast at the election in each of at least two-thirds of all the States in the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory Abuja.”
The pleader here simply employed the very language of Section 134 (2) (a) and (b) of the 1999 Constitution.
Responding INEC veritably admitted the above quoted Mr Peter Obi’s averment and gallantly proceeded to plead for emphasis thus: “The 1st Respondent admits Paragraph 81 of the Petition only to the extent that since the election was contested by more than 2 (two) candidates,a candidate shall be declared winner only if he scores the highest number of votes cast at the election and he has not less than one quarter of the votes cast at election in each of at least two thirds of the 36 (thirty six) States and the Federal Capital Territory Abuja.”
The law is as elementary as it is rudimentary and for wholesome effect that parties are gauged by their pleadings and they are generally restricted to adduce evidence in respect of pleaded facts.
Fortunately for the parties, to wit H E Peter Obi and INEC, the Nation, the Rule of Law and procedural prescriptions the results of the Presidential Election for FCT Abuja are not in issue.
INEC declared and published that APC, PDP, LP and NNPP respectively scored 90, 902; 74,194; 281,717 and 4, 517.
It is without doubt that the duty to DECLARE the results of the Presidential Election is bestowed on INEC.
INEC has declared the result and in its pleading stated above, Inec admitted that securing 25% of the votes cast in FCT Abuja is a condition precedent to valid declaration of a Presidential Candidate as winner of the election.
In consequence of the foregoing, no matter the majesty, weight, erudition or otherwise of the various opinions of espoused by commentirs (and even the parties before the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal), INEC the constitutional custodian of the power to DECLARE the winner of the election, has taken a stance: and the position of INEC pursuant to its pleading is that a prospective winner of Presidential Election MUST win 25% of the votes cast in at least two thirds of all the States in the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory Abuja.
Thus, between Mr Peter Obi of Labour Party and INEC, the matter of whether a Presidential Candidate must score 25% of the votes cast in Abuja to be validly declared a winner is no more contentious or in issue.
However, whether the declared candidate attained the said constitutional benchmark is resolvable by reference to result of FCT Abuja declared by INEC. This is also not disputatious.
In this state of affairs, the vehement insistence by the Vice Presidential Candidate of Labour Party Dr Datti Baba-Ahmed that the President elect should not be sworn in because obvious constitutional constraints, finds some tenable justification. This however must be done in pursuance of due process because though the Chief Justice of Nigeria swore to uphold the country’s constitution, such avowed solemn duty must be carried out within the regime of legality.
Since the matter of winning 25% of FCT Abuja votes is clearly devoid of disputations of facts, it would accord more with justice if it is set down and interlocutorily resolved in view of the state of the relevant pleadings of the parties.
The Chief Justice of Nigeria is not expected to act in vacuo or dehors the law.
The matter is before a tribunal of competent jurisdiction which is imbued with the inherent constitutional powers.
In this wise, the requisite application ought to be made to the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal to specifically set down for resolution the pivotal straightforward issue of a candidate scoring 25% of the votes cast in FCT Abuja before being declared a winner of the election and concomitantly sworn in as President or expedite action in the entire conduct of the Presidential Election proceedings.
A dilatory or lackluster approach to this transcendental matter may eventuate some unpleasant trajectory.
There are reports of citizens resorting to litigation on the expected inauguration of a new President on 29th May 2023. This may degenerate and engender issuance of conflicting court orders reminiscent of “June 12 saga.”
Therefore, all illustrious stakeholders, most especially the operators of the judex, should rise up now to contain the imminent topsy-turvy.
In election matters, time is of radical essence and importance. Also, the confidence of the citizens should not be made to wane by acts of omission or commission by the operators of the judicial system in this instance, the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal.
It is therefore gratifying and salubrious that the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal publicly promised to deliver justice and beckoned on lawyers to rise to the occasion as committed ministers in the hallowed alter and temple of justice.
Election Petition is an aspect and integral part of the electoral process. Before and during the electoral process, the people normally participated. But when judicial proceedings are ongoing, the people constitutionally acclaimed as the source of democratic power, do not play active roles in the adjudicatory process. Therefore, a proactive approach should be adopted because of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the pending Presidential Election cases.
The narrative is becoming momentous with the applications for real time telecast of the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal proceedings.
The unvarnished truth is that Nigerians are becoming increasingly unease with the present state of affairs as the integrity of state institutions is obviously questionable.
It therefore behoves the judiciary to ensure that justice is not only done but expeditiously, manifestly and undoubtedly seen to have been done.
Now is the accepted time. And now is the time to reinvent Nigeria of our collective dreams and aspirations where justice will roll down like water and righteousness as an overflowing stream.
Arise O Compatriots
Okoli-Akirika Esq was Commissioner for Lands in Anambra State. He was also former State Secretary of APGA and PDP