EXCITING NEWS: TNG WhatsApp Channel is LIVE…
Subscribe for FREE to get LIVE NEWS UPDATE. Click here to subscribe!
By Inuwa Bashir
Many candidates who lost in the February 25 presidential and national assembly elections and the March 18 governorship and state assembly polls have filed petitions at the presidential and state election petition tribunals to challenge the outcome of the polls.
So far, over 100 election petitions have been filed by aggrieved candidates and their parties across the country. The presidential candidates of the Peoples’ Democratic Party, Atiku Abubakar; the Labour Party, Peter Obi; the Action Alliance, Solomon Okangbuan; Allied People’s Movement, Chichi Ojei, have also filed petitions for the nullification of the presidential election results. These could push the nation’s judiciary to a breaking point.
On its part, the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, has budgeted over N3bn to defend the results of the five elections it supervised. Last November, the INEC Chairman, Mahmood Yakubu lamented that the commission was handling over 600 cases in several courts across the federation.
Speaking at a capacity-building workshop for over 300 judges that would handle election disputes, he revealed that the cases pending against the electoral body relate to the conduct of primaries by political parties.
It could also be recalled that in February 2015, the then Chief Justice of Nigeria, CJN, Justice Mahmud Mohammed, lamented that the judiciary has been greatly overburdened by political matters.
He spoke at a Public Dialogue on the Future of Justice Administration in Nigeria organised at the National Judicial Institute, NJI, by the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA. According to the respected CJN, the country was struggling “to provide an efficient, fair and effective justice system that would be able to ensure that everyone, regardless of station or status, can access quality justice that is administered quickly.
His words: “The current reality paints a sobering picture. The number of cases pending before the courts has reached critical proportions and we must use all appropriate means to stop it from spiralling out of control.
“If one considers the number of cases pending in high courts and other courts of record, you will agree with me that the situation is indeed disturbing and sobering.”
Although the former CJN spoke some eight years ago, the essence of his laments resonates with the reality today, if not worse.
The judiciary’s role in determining the outcome of elections is constitutionally and statutorily provided by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (1999 Constitution) and the Electoral Act, 2022, respectively.
The 1999 Constitution has, under section 6, vested the judicial powers of the federation in the courts established by the Constitution. These provisions imply that all disputes, including election disputes, shall be submitted to the Courts for adjudication and resolution.
Similarly, Part VIII Electoral Act, 2022 has expressly vested the determination of election petitions arising from Elections on the various Election Tribunals established by the Act.
As it were, the Electoral Act is very central to electoral adjudication. The Act envisages two main types of disputes- pre-election and post-election disputes. All disputes relating to disqualification, nomination, substitution and sponsorship of candidates for an election precede the voting proper in an election and are treated as pre-election matters.
The Courts often do substantial justice by determining the petition on its merits and making a pronouncement as to whether a Petitioner was validly returned elected. Sometimes the courts refrain from entertaining the substance of the Petition, especially where such a petition is incompetent for want of strict compliance with the Electoral Act.
Former CJN Mohammed Bello Adoke provides some insight into the complex web of adjudication of electoral matters: “The judiciary does not discharge its adjudicatory functions based on the whims and caprices of the Judges but within the confines of a complex web of laws, rules and case law.
“Also, as is usual with every human endeavour, the process of adjudication is sometimes challenged by the incompetence of the judex to navigate the inconsistent, vague, and overly complex rules and procedures that attend the process, including the ever-increasing wave of political pressures and interference.”
It then not surprising that litigating election disputes is contentious, complex, and often excessively technical. The technicality of electoral dispute litigation is fueled by the strict requirements of the Electoral Act, coupled with judicial attitudes over the years.
The complex and technical nature of election petitions is largely responsible for the time consumption involved and the failure of election tribunals and courts to address the grievances of litigants despite efforts at resolving such election disputes.
These scenarios are indisputably overburdening the judiciary. Today, Nigeria has one Supreme Court for a population of more than 206 million. It’s no secret that the justices are overwhelmed and overburdened.
Overburdening the judiciary through excessive electoral litigations automatically fertilizes corruption in the judicial system and this must be addressed through multiple approaches.
The emerging consensus from a cross-section of stakeholders is that technology should be applied to the administration of justice in Nigeria, perhaps including a more efficient use and application of electronic hearing, accessible to the public.
All originating motions and summons should be filed and heard through electronic platforms. Judgment should also be delivered by electronic medium.
Bashir, a legal practitioner and notary public, sent this piece from Kano.