Nigeria Content Online

The plan for the general elections
suffered a setback last week when a federal high court sitting in Abuja
ruled that there should be no governorship elections in five states in
April because the governors started their terms after they won rerun
elections in their states. The governors of the five states: Ibrahim
Idris of Kogi, Aliyu Wamako of Sokoto, Timiprieye Sylva of Bayelsa,
Murtala Nyako of Adamawa and Liyel Imoke of Cross-River had, last
September, challenged the decision of the Independent National
Electoral Commission (INEC) to conduct governorship polls in their
states this year while, according to them, their tenure was still
running. They also asked the court to stop their party, the People’s
Democratic Party (PDP), from conducting any primaries for the
governorship elections in their states.

The presiding judge, Adamu Bello,
in his judgment, held that since the 2007 elections which initially
brought the governors to power was nullified and set aside by courts of
competent jurisdiction, the oath of office and allegiance subscribed to
by the five governors had been nullified and set aside along with the
elections.

“The tenure of governors starts counting from the day they took their oath of office and oath of allegiance,” the judge said.

The ruling also set new dates for
the termination of the tenures of the governors. Ibrahim Idris, Kogi,
will stay on till April 5, 2012; Aliyu Wammakko, Sokoto, remains till
May 28, 2012; Timipre Sylva, Bayelsa, leaves the next day on May 29,
2012; Liyel Imoke’s tenure in Cross River terminates on August 28,
2012; and Murtala Nyako, Adamawa, gets his tenure extended till April
30, 2012. INEC had last August announced that the tenures of governors
who were re-elected after their 2007 elections were cut short by
tribunals would end on May 29, 2011. The position of the electoral
commission was bolstered by an amendment to the electoral act. Section
135 of the principal act, which deals with governors’ tenure, was
amended in subsection (2) by insertion of a new paragraph, c. It states
that: “In the determination of the four-year term, where a rerun
election has taken place and the person earlier sworn in wins the rerun
election, the time spent in the office before the date the election was
annulled, shall be taken into account.” INEC also advised political
parties to organise primaries in the states, which the affected
governors also participated in, although their lawsuit challenging the
primaries was still in court. As it happened, all the governors won the
party primaries and have already started their campaign for the April
election.

Appeal the judgement

INEC said at the weekend that it
was still studying the judgement and will not announce its next move
until its lawyers have provided legal advice. But one of the counsel to
the commission said at the weekend that the electoral body might appeal
the judgement.

“Our teams of legal experts are
still studying the judgment and may likely appeal against it and
election will hold in those states, as we will apply for an order of
stay of judgment pending the determination of the matter,” he said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Some of the candidates of other
parties have also threatened to challenge the court ruling regardless
of the decision of INEC on the matter. The governorship candidate of
the Congress of Progressive Change in Adamwa State, Buba Marwa, who
expressed disagreement with the court ruling on the extension in which
the tenure of the state governor, Mr. Nyako of Adamawa state will
subsist until 2012, said the ruling makes rigging of elections
attractive to the political class.

“The deeper meaning is that it is
an incentive to rig. We are not in agreement and that is why we are
appealing it for the elections to hold this year,” he said.

“This is in fact without prejudice
to what INEC will do because originally the governors took INEC to
court. But as an interested party we are appealing the case and I have
reached out to all our teeming supporters and members of our great
party, the CPC to remain calm and continue with our programmes. Because
our programmes continue and we are expecting to flag of in a couple of
days.”

In his explanation of the
rationale for his planned court action, Mr. Marwa said a postponement
of governorship elections in the five states will only serve to confer
“additional bonus” to the benefitting governors.

He said the issue to be considered
was whether the original framers of the constitution intended for the
occupants to serve four years as governor or they can continue to take
advantage of judicial electoral victories to serve “extended tenure of
office”.

“Because if I know this will
happen, then I will rig the elections blatantly and in a manifest
manner so that the other side will take me to the tribunal,” Mr. Marwa
said. “This type of thing is something that we should address.” Mr.
Marwa’s stand is at variance with that of other opposition political
parties in the state, who are rather appealing to INEC and the federal
government to appeal the judgement in order to have it set it aside.

Aghanya Dennis, the former
national publicity secretary for the CPC called for an appeal by INEC,
adding that the judgement can only be resolved by the Supreme Court.

“The matter should be appealed by
INEC and the Supreme Court should give it accelerated hearing. Maybe
the judgment may be upturned at that level,” he said. “The danger in
the judgment is that electoral crime is encouraged rather than
discouraged. For somebody who was confirmed to have enjoyed a stolen
mandate in the first place and his victory was upturned by a court of
law to be given this reprieve by the same court of justice is a
contradiction to the same justice the court is expected to give. A
thief is a thief, however, you look at it. But whom do you blame, the
judge who abided by the constitution or the beneficiaries of the
judgment who are exercising their constitutional right?” Basssey
Ewa-Henshaw, a senator, (PDP, Cross River) said he was baffled by the
judgment, especially as it ran counter to an earlier ruling by the
Supreme court.

“If I remember correctly, the Supreme Court had already taken a
decision on the matter, that if you were the incumbent and you had to
go for a re-run and you won, your tenure continued from where it
stopped. This judgment is a bit baffling to me and I need to be able to
look at the two judgments to know what the judges used as a foundation
to arrive at their decisions. The Supreme Court is the apex court and
it is superior to the Court of Appeal,” he said.