Bayelsa Judgement : What Could INEC Have Done ?

Tunji Buhari tunji
Tunji Buhari tunji

By Gbade Ademola.

Much have been said about the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Bayelsa Gubernatorial Elections and very many views will still be expressed in respect of the subject but as an Election Manager, bringing some of the latent nitty gritty of the matter to the fore would not be out of order.
The fact remains that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has presented the Certificate of Return to Senator Douye Diri as Bayelsa State Governor-Elect in full compliance to the decision of the Supreme Court and declaration as winner of the November 16, 2019 elections.
Perhaps, we need to expressly place at the public domain the reasons highlighted in the judgement why David Lyon was deprived of the mandate supposedly given him by his people; the Deputy Governorship candidate of APC provided and submitted conflicting information concerning his identity and the educational certificates he submitted to INEC among others as follows:
i.1976 Primary School Certificate as Degi Biobaragha.
ii. 1984 WAEC school Certificate as Adegi Biobakumo.
iii. In 1990 University first degree Certificate as Degi Biobarakuma.
vi. In the year 2002 in University MBA as Degi Biobarakuma Wangagha.
v. In 2018 and 2019 INEC Forms CF001 as Biobarakuma Degi-Eremiwenyo.
vi. In the Newspaper publication and the affidavits sworn to by Degi before two different Notary Public the names of Degi were conflicting and varied.
You may wish to note that Section 187 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 makes it mandatory for a Governorship Candidate to have a Deputy Governorship Candidate before his own candidature can be valid. If the candidature of the deputy governorship candidate is for any reason invalid, that of the Governor is adversely affected.
Section 187(1) provides “in any election to which the foregoing provisions of this part of this Chapter relate a candidate for the office of Governor of a State shall not be deemed to have been validly nominated for such office unless he nominates another candidate as his associate for his running for the office of Governor, who is to occupy the office of Deputy Governor; and that candidate shall be deemed to have been duly elected to the office of Deputy Governor if the candidate who nominated him is duly elected as Governor in accordance with the said provisions.”
Further to above provision Section 187 (2) provides “the provisions of this Part of this Chapter relating to qualification for election, tenure of office, disqualifications, declaration of assets and liabilities and Oath of Governor shall apply in relation to the office of Deputy Governor as if references to Governor were references to Deputy Governor.”
The aforementioned provisions in the ground norm simply means the ticket of the Governorship and Deputy Governorship candidates are same in the eye of law.
Little wonder the Supreme Court in its ruling upheld the November 12, 2019 judgment of the Federal High Court in Abuja which had disqualified Degi-Eremienyo in the election for submitting forged certificates to INEC. The court ruled that Degi-Eremienyo’s disqualification had infected the joint ticket with which he and the governorship candidate, Lyon, ran for and won November 16, 2019.
Back to the crux of the discourse, l agreed with the position of some legal experts saying even if the required spread of the votes of PDP was to be considered the principle of substantial compliance as applied in the 1979 Supreme Court judgement in case of Awolowo vs. Shagari & others is enough a precedence in this case and that PDP candidate stands duly elected because the votes of APC has by inference, become null and void and could not be seen or taken as if it existed at all.
However, beyond this Bayelsa judgement there are so many things to be worried about ; the issuance of contradictory court pronouncements on same electoral matters , inconsistent interpretations of the Electoral Laws and so many contradictory rulings from Nigerian Courts at various levels often constrained the management of elections across the three phases of electoral cycle.
For instance one need to read the recent judgement in case of Atiku vs. Buhari where Supreme Court seemed to make educational qualifications non issue. The 2015 judgement in respect of Hon Faleke’s claims that he had a joint ticket with the late Audu in Kogi State Gubernatorial Elections should also be juxtaposed with the Balyesa ruling for proper understanding of inconsistency in our Court pronouncements.
The resort to the courts to validate non-existing mandate or even party congresses has resulted in increase in judicial corruption and non-resolution of internal party crises through party mechanisms set up for that purpose.
In his appraisal of 2019 General Elections, the INEC Chairman, Prof Mahmoud Yakub observed that ” INEC has been sued or joined in over 640 Court cases arising from the nomination of candidates and as at the day of postponement there were 40 different Court orders against the Commission on whether to add or drop candidates ”
Here comes the dilemma of the Election Management Bodies(EMBs) and Election Managers operating in the theatre of badly politicised and debased judiciary that ordinarily suppose to be the last hope of the common man.
Meanwhile, Prof Ladipo Adamolekun had forewarned that ” a polity that seeks judicial answers to political questions runs the risk of undermining its judiciary while simultaneously perpetuating the underdevelopment of its political process “.
It is therefore incumbent on the citizens not to leave the solution for electoral problems to the judiciary and EMBs alone, the current negative trends in our electoral process call for immediate concerted efforts and strong agitations for reform in the Electoral laws and adjudication of electoral disputes before the politicians and their conspirators in the judiciary plunges the nation into political quagmire.
Some analysts have been pointing accusing fingers to INEC for not being thorough with the screening of parties’ candidates before presenting them for open contests.
It’s really unfortunate, in this circumstance there is practically nothing the INEC could have done. The best it could do is to observe the discrepancies in the educational and other required credentials of the candidate or better still, INEC could only point out any observed flaws to the political party and stakeholders at large.
By the virtue of the judicial precedence from the 2007 Supreme Court judgement in case of Atiku Abubakar vs INEC & others, the Election Management Bodies( be it INEC or SIECs) in Nigeria have lost their power to disqualify any candidate.
Prior to this judgement, INEC used to disqualify candidates if detected not have met with stipulated requirements for the position being vied for.
I wish to seriously align with the position of so many people saying that politicians in Nigeria need to learn their lessons hard way.
The fact that there is a subsisting judgement of the same Supreme Court prohibiting EMBs disqualifying candidates of Political Parties from contesting elections has been giving political parties the audacity and unrestrained power to field candidates of questionable characters and flawed credentials for elections.
I believe with this judgement, political parties will be more cautious with characters being thrown up for elective positions.

Share This Article