“If you close your eyes to facts, you will learn through accidents. – African Proverb
Never before in the 109-year history [1914-2023] of Nigeria has the judiciary faced a more gargantuan task to prove its independence. Also, it has to prove itself capable of defending Nigeria’s toddling democracy and the constitution. Indeed, the job is enormous, given the ongoing presidential election petition hearing as a test case. The expectations come from various quarters in diverse forms and are unmindful of pressures from the powers that be, including untoward inducements or career push.
For instance, nominating justices for the Supreme Court now remains curious. Ditto the increased allowances and retirement age for judicial officers. Public affairs analysts see these moves as more strategic than mere happenstance. The apprehension stems from the fact that three out of the five justices who adjudicated on the 2019 presidential election petitions got elevated to the apex soon after their questionable judgement. It deserves mention here that one of the elevated justices died after the promotion. As things stand, hope is not lost about the certainty of justice from the current tribunal, given the assurances from the tribunals to Nigerians and the international community that justice would not be served but seen to be so. Moreover, the judges would toe the path of the law and good conscience.
Recently, the judiciary received implied external push [call it “pressure,” if you like] from the observer team of the European Union that released a 94-page damning report on the 2023 general elections in Nigeria. For a country whose officials and institutions deign to views from outside and for a people vertically divided by politics along ethnic and religious lines, the no-confidence position of the EU observer team on the last general elections is very timely and necessary to help the justices arrive at their decisions. Even though their points are weighty and punchy, what they observed was already public knowledge in Nigeria.
Having given their blunt verdict on the elections, which face judicial challenges in courts across the federation, the damning EU report multiplied the pressure to dig deeper for who truly won the February 25 polls. In many ways, the final report from an external body that people see as neutral and unbiased has undoubtedly escalated whatever stress the Nigerian judiciary might be experiencing, as it compiles tomes of exhibits/evidence at the various election tribunals. Whichever way the adjudicators go in the matter before them, this EU final report, coming at this time, will have a strong impact on the final rulings on the petitions.
If the petition tribunals adjudge evidence before them as biased and coming from interested parties, the same cannot be said of the Europeans. From what they know as Nigerians and what has been made available to them at different election tribunals, both bar and bench cannot lack proof to help them arrive at a rational and popular decision on the outcome of the highly contentious elections. Both PDP and Labour have provided enough evidence to the tribunal to enable them to make a fair decision.
As it stands now, the onus will be on the judiciary to choose the path to follow to avert getting the type of bashing the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, is getting from Nigerians and the international community. The third arm of government has ample opportunity to right the wrongs and take the glory as the last hope of the electorate that saved democracy in our land.
Here are some of the points raised by the EU final report that is causing disquiet and jitters in the camp of the ruling APC, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, and the INEC:
“Nigeria’s elections early this year were marred by problems that reduced public trust in electoral processes.”
“That there were multiple reports of over voting and voters intimidation by supporters of the ruling All Progressives Congress and results were barely uploaded on a new electronic portal introduced to improve transparency in real-time.”
“A lack of transparency and operational failures reduced trust in the process and challenged the right to vote.”
Barry Andrews, the chief observer who presented the report, said it was based on the analysis of compliance with Nigeria’s regional and international commitments for democratic elections The observation team noted that the elections exposed enduring systemic weaknesses that needed to be corrected.
Based on their observations and investigations, they recommended reforms to enhance transparency and accountability in subsequent elections in the country.
According to the EU report, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) should improve in six priority areas, including removing ambiguities in electoral law, ensuring the real-time publication of and access to election results, and clamping down on electoral offences.
“Shortcomings in law and electoral administration hindered the conduct of well-run and inclusive elections and damaged trust in INEC,” the report said.
What is glaring is that nothing said by the European Union about the February 25 and March 18, 2023, elections is new and virgin to Nigerians.
Local voices on the election are even more vociferous and direct. The locals know much about the other variables that could make BVAS upload two out of the three elections on the same day and time by the same device but fail to uphold one. The EU’s answer to this cannot adequately address that especially when the glitches being claimed by INEC are not being supported by science and technology deployed in the election.
The vocal human rights lawyer, Femi Falana reacting to the EU report said, “I have found reports in the local media much more credible than the report of the EU.
“For instance, they were saying that about 97 people were killed. The local media have reported about 137 deaths and the human rights community has confirmed that.”
The reform recommendations from the EU have become rituals every four years and just as the Union thought things were improving so those truncating it are reforming their criminal ingenuity and impunity.
Just when Nigerians thought they had blocked all the loopholes to electoral fraud and were hoping to have a whole people’s mandate election, the criminals came up with something new to defend their actions.
It is, therefore to be understood, the angst and fretfulness the EU report is generating that made the presidency ridiculously and shamelessly claim that February 25, 2023, is the best in Nigeria since 1999. The same people that sent a minister to lobby for congratulatory messages from Western leaders are now abusing them for stating the facts as they saw them.
What was glaring was the malicious undermining by the umpire of the electoral process. These facts are well known to everybody. What the EU did was just to align itself to truth and set itself free of having a guilty conscience.
All eyes are on the judiciary to see how much good conscience and raw courage it will bring to bear on this matter. Which type of history will they make, and what legacy will they leave behind? Is it the legacy of saving democracy or of nailing and burying it? The global democratic community is watching and waiting for the tribunal rulings. The EU has played its role, giving sincere and unpaid advice. It’s left for Nigeria to take or leave it.
We leave readers with this African proverb, “Advice is a stranger; if it is welcome, it stays for the night. If not, it leaves the same day.” God help us.