Nigerian Judiciary And 2015 Elections

As the 2015 general elections approach, the input of the Nigerian Judiciary in ensuring that the polls are credible is of critically important and must not be undermined. Certainly, elections should be won or lost at the polls but the judiciary is often saddled with a greater responsibility of determining the real winners or losers in the event of controversial results.

This role of the court has, however, become a source of worry given that the conclusion of elections and the declaration of results by the nation’s electoral umpire, the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, is often no longer the end of the electoral process.

Part of the mechanisms put in place by Section 285(1) – (4) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic as amended, to ensure free, fair and credible electoral process in the country, is the establishment of election petition tribunals to determine petitions arising from elections conducted in the country. This process, which ideally is a hallmark of the democratic process is, however, beginning to constitute a burden to the democratic procedure.

Since the return to democratic rule in 1999, the Election Petition Tribunals and not the INEC, seem to have become the determiners of the winners of the mandate at elections conducted by the electoral commission. For instance, since 1999, several political office holders including at least five state governors have had their victories as announced by INEC nullified. The process raises concern as to who between the INEC, the electorate and the courts should determine the winner of an election.

That is why we feel the recent call for the enactment of a legislation that will make it compulsory for INEC to conduct fresh elections in instances where the election tribunal invalidates a mandate is worth considering.  Certainly, elections should be won or lost at the polls not in a court of law. It is definitely not democratic for the decision of one judge to supersede the will of the entire voting population because such practice could actually lead to impunity.

Perhaps, the National Assembly needs to reintroduce in the Electoral Act, the provision in Section 140 (2) which required the conduct of fresh election where an election tribunal or court nullifies an election on the grounds that the person who obtained the highest votes at the election was not qualified to contest the election or that the election was marred by substantial irregularities or non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act.

No doubt as the country moves towards another general elections in 2015, the effective resolution of electoral disputes is central to the integrity of any electoral process. Challenges to controversial outcomes or allegations of interference must be resolved in an impartial manner in such a way that the winner and loser alike can respect the final results.

Frivolous applications by lawyers seeking to stall the electoral process must be discarded expeditiously and sanction meted out to such lawyers. The National Judicial Commission must more than ever, live up to its responsibility of sanctioning judges who exhibit clear bias in their handling of election matters. This will indeed go a long way in not only giving the polls credibility but also engendering confidence in the system. We believe that as Nigerians aspire for change, the judiciary has a sacred duty to ensure that that change is accomplished and sustained.