Nigeria Content Online

On Monday, August
30 2010, Mohammed Idris, the presiding judge in the suit brought before
the Federal High Court in Lagos by Harrison Jalla, President of the
National Association of Nigerian Footballers (NANF) challenging the
decision of the Nigeria Football Federation (NFF) to hold elections
into the executive committee of the NFF without holding state
elections, was very angry.

One week earlier he
had ordered that the NFF stay action on the election slated for August
26 until issues pertaining to the case before him had been argued by
parties involved. But the NFF claimed it did not receive a copy of the
order and went ahead to hold the elections. Idris, feeling slighted by
the action threatened to come down heavily on officials of the
federation if he is able to ascertain that the NFF received the order.
The case was subsequently adjourned to tomorrow.

The election ranks
as one of the most contentious in recent times. Indeed, many have
argued that given the furore it generated, it has surpassed the 2005
version, which ushered Sani Lulu and his team into office, in drama and
intrigue.

One of the key
issues that pitted opponents against NFF officials was the amendment in
2008 of the statutes of the federation, which extended the tenure of
some delegates to the federation’s congress, specifically, the chairmen
of state football associations. Under the old law those elected in 2006
were supposed to leave office in mid 2010, after a period of four
years.

The first amendment, which extended their stay, had indicated
they would be finishing their tenure either in November or December
this year. When this amendment drew protest from intending candidates
for the NFF presidency particular former Green Eagles captain, Segun
Odegbami who petitioned FIFA, Sani Lulu, the then president of the NFF
who authored the amendment, withdrew the clause. In the final draft of
the statutes, which formed the basis of the August 26 elections, there
was no reference to election of state FA chairmen. This present
election, which saw Aminu Maigari emerge as new president of the
federation has also thrown up the question of which laws a body
comprised of Nigerians and operating within Nigeria but affiliated to
an international body should give preference to.

Nigerian laws supreme

The NFF by virtue
of it being a member of FIFA is bound to operate within the ambit of
the statutes of the world football governing body. However, in the case
of a conflict between the laws of FIFA and that of Nigeria, which
should take precedence?

“The Nigeria
Football Federation is subject to Nigerian laws and the jurisdiction of
Nigerian courts,” says Jiti Ogunye, a Lagos-based lawyer.

“By no stretch of
the imagination can FIFA laws, which forbid the interference of third
parties in the activities of national football federations mean that
jurisdiction of our courts over Nigerians in the NFF as well as their
processes or conduct within Nigerian territorial space be excluded.
Now, we are aware that court stopped elections but that the NFF brushed
it aside. As a lawyer I know that it is grossly contemptuous.

“The presidency was
said to have intervened the first time the election was supposed to
have held and the NFF deferred to it and shifted the elections to
another day. Now, the same body that deferred to executive arm refused
to defer to the court. This happened because both contestants and
organisers feel the court is toothless. We desecrate our institutions
when we disobey court orders and the court is enjoined by law to punish
such individuals.”

Ogunye says
according to law those eligible for punishment include both officials
of the NFF including members of the electoral committee and those who
contested the elections. He said the decision to go ahead with the
election despite court order reflects a typical Nigerian attitude.

“What salvage work,
what urgency was there that they could not wait to discharge the order
before holding the election?” he asked.

“Are we going to
another World Cup or another Nations Cup? It is typical Nigerian
attitude to disobey our courts. When the governor of a state issues
orders, we obey immediately. We obey the governor because we know he
dispenses favours and can bring in the police when we flout his
directives but we disdain judges, and say after all is it not just one
judge there in his robes, what can he do?”

Jonathan’s green light

The NFF may have been helped along in its decision to flout the court order by the acquiescence of President Goodluck Jonathan.

“President Jonathan
was informed of the court order but he refused to order Maigari to call
off the election,” a source in the NSC said.

“The President is
busy trying to perfect strategies for his candidacy for next year’s
elections and he doesn’t want to offend anybody hence his refusal to
act,” the source added.

President
Jonathan’s nod for the elections to go ahead was a huge disappointment
for officials of the sports ministry who had before the meeting with
President Jonathan tried to dissuade Maigari from going ahead with the
conduct of the elections.

No reprisals

Ordinarily in
situations like this where a body like the NFF, which is under the
supervision of the sports ministry goes against its wishes, sanctions
would have been visited on it. One of the ways in which that would have
happened is for the ministry to withholding funds from the NFF. Had
that happened the NFF would have run from pillar to post seeking funds
to prosecute today’s match against Madagascar in Calabar.

“We will not be withholding funding from the NFF. There is provision
made for them in the sports ministry budget and nobody is tampering
with it,” said Tony Ohaeri, spokesman of the NSC.