2019: INEC raises concern over conflicting judgment, orders

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has expressed concern over the conflicting judgments and consequential orders emanating from the Court of laws ahead of the forthcoming 2019 general polls.

The inconsistency, INEC Chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu pointed out is putting the commission in a difficult situation.

In the last one week, there has been two different court pronouncement on Zamafara, one coming from a High Court in Zamafara while an Abuja High Court also issued a different order concerning INEC decision excluding All Progressive Congress (APC) from Zamfara State from the coming elections as a result of not conducting their primaries within the time lag.

Already the commission has been dragged into 396 pre-election cases pending court cases as a result of the fallout of the party primaries.

Besides, the commission has so far received 302 requests for certified true copies of documents from primaries monitored, which serves as a prelude for more legal actions.

This is aside the 52 petitions on protests from aggrieved party aspirants received by the commission, which all have financial implication to INEC.

INEC has fixed 16 February, 2019 for the presidential and National Assembly poll while 2nd of March has been slated for the governorship, state Assembly and council elections.

Speaking yesterday at the workshop election petition for Justice and Judges, Yakubu noted the inevitability of disputes in the course of democratic elections.

He  therefore explained that because democratic elections are adjudicated by the Judiciary, the commission has always been obeying court orders.

He however expressed the concern of the commission regarding conflicting orders from the court.

Yakubu said: For our part, there are two major areas of concern. First is the issue of conflicting judgements arising from pre-electlon and post-election cases. As a firm believer in the rule of law, the Commission always obeys court orders or, where it is considered necessary‘ appeals them In the interest of justice.

“There have been over 1,200 cases involving the Commission since the 2015 General Elections and not in a single case has the Commission disobeyed a court order. However, conflicting judgements, especially by courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction at the High Court level, are putting the Commission in a very difficult posttion and creating uncertainty in the process.

“The Court in one judicial division may order the Commission on a particular course of action only to be contradicted by another court of coordinate jurisdiction from another division or even within the same division on the same subject matter. Conflicting court orders are negatively affecting the consistency, neutrality, and public perception, not only of the Commission, but the judiciary as well. There is therefore the urgent need to address the issue of conflicting judgements in order to engender certainty in the electoral process.

“Our second area of concern relates to the lack of consequential Orders by the Courts after making findings on an issue and stating the position. In such cases, the Commission is compelled to take a position relying on previous decisions of the Court on the subject. This as in some cases made the Commission appear inconsistent and has also led to protracted litigation. Closely related to this, is the issue of Orders to maintain the status quo by the Court without stating the exact status quo intended. This has given room to parties to misinterpret the order to suit their purpose, thereby knowingly causing confusion and controversy.”

He however reassured Nigerians that “INEC will continue to do its best to bring about free, fair, credible and peaceful general elections in Nigeria this year. We therefore hope to continue to count on the support, cooperation and understanding of all towards attaining that objective. ”

Read Also: INEC transfers Ekiti REC

On the workshop, Yakubu said is coming at an auspicious time, barely two weeks to the 20l9 General Elections. There is no gain belaboring the obvious that elections in particular and democratic processes in general are governed by legislation.

The inevitable disputes that arise in the course of democratic elections are adjudicated by the Judiciary. This means that there is no democracy without the rule of law and there is no rule of law without the Judiciary. It is for this reason that the independent National Electoral Commission (IN EC) considers this Workshop necessary in the best interest of our democracy.

“The survival of our democratic process and the consolidation of the reforms aimed at entrenching stability and deepening democratic culture and ideals require the commitment of all stakeholders. To this end, as a critical stakeholder in the electoral process, this Workshop is significant to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) for at least two reasons. First, it affords INEC a platform to further record its concerns about the adjudication of electoral disputes as we approach the 2019 General Elections. Secondly, to receive feedback from the sector that has reviewed our activities over the years with respect to the areas we need to d9 more in to facilitate the speedy and qualitative administration of justice which, from our study and analysis of previous Judgments, range from the prompt issuance of certified true copies of documents, quality and consistency of our representation, neutrality of the Commission, to making available to the Judiciary our manuals, guidelines and regulations made pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution and the Electoral Act.”

In his remark, the Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria. Justice Ibrahim Tanko Mohammed stressed the need for the judiciary to be independent and neutral in the discharge of their responsibility.

He also the warned judges on the need to avoid external influence from political parties.

He said: “it is Important that the Judiciary must maintain absolute independence. Judges should handle election petitions without any external pressure or influence either by political parties stakeholders or economic interest groups.

“The Judiciary must continue to take steps to ensure that It is not seen as being partisan but must always demonstrate manifest integrity in its adjudicatory processes. Consequently, Judicial officers serving on election petition tribunals must note that Judgments must not be ambiguous and should be devoid of any form of external Influence. Your Lordships should shun unnecessary associations with lawyers who may be acting as conduits for Politicians no matter how innocent they may be portrayed.

“You must guard your integrity and the integrity of the Judiciary, by avondmg acts that will bring you under the disciplinary jurisdiction of the National Judicial Council, as It Will not hesitate to Wield the big stick of sanctions to any Judicial Officer who is found wanting in the discharge of his duties”

He also added that judiciary will do its best to be conversant with the rules.

“On our part the Judiciary will continue to do its best to ensure that Judicial Officers remain conversant with  the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) and other relevant laws toward‘ ensuring efficiency and uniformity in the quality of Judicial decision,” he said