Monrovia — A high-powered delegation from the Economic Community of West African States is due in the country this week to consult with stakeholders in the Liberian peace process.

Informed sources told our reporter that Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo would touch down at the Robert International Airport Friday, accompanied by high-level officials of his government and ECOWAS.

Former Nigerian Head of State Gen. Abdul-Salamy Abubakar, ECOWAS' chief facilitator, is also expected to arrive in the country today, officials told our reporter. He is also due to confer with various stakeholders, including National Elections Commission (NEC) officials, political parties, independent candidates and the civil society organizations.

The expected arrival of the ECOWAS officials comes as political leaders and elections stakeholders gear in final preparations for next Tuesday's elections, designed to usher in a democratic civilian government.

It also comes as controversy erupts over the rejection of independent presidential candidates seeking to participate in the polls. Many of the rejected candidates were flown to Abuja at the weekend in hopes of finding solution to the political row arising from their rejection.

Recently, the Supreme Court partly granted and dismissed the case of the rejected presidential candidates to participate in the ensuing elections.

The court granted the appeal against the decision of the NEC, which had rejected independent candidates Marcus R. Jones, and his running mate, Sam Mohammed Kromah; Cornelius N. Hunter and his running mate, Cecelia Teah; and independent candidate Isaac Johnson. Latest reports suggested that some of the candidates were expected to return home last night.

The court had, however, confirmed NEC's refusal to allow independent candidate Garkpe Gedekpah and his running mate Sylvester Singbe to participate in the elections. They had reportedly failed to present the vice presidential candidate's document(s) as required by elections guidelines.

For the candidates who won their legal battle, the Court ordered the NEC to give them seven days, beginning September 27, 2005, to correct any error(s) on the documents submitted with their declaration of intents.

"If and when the said correction(s) are satisfactorily made, the NEC is ordered to have their names included on the ballots for the October 11, 2005 general and presidential elections," the court order reads.

But it remains to be seen how far the candidates will go with the whole process of documentation and electioneering campaigns. The deadline for campaigning activities is October 9, exactly 4 days away. If they go through the formalities as the other 22 presidential candidates have done, then voters will be casting their ballots for 24 presidential aspirants.

That independent candidates said they declared their political intentions between 2004 and 2005 to contest the forth coming general and presidential elections scheduled for October 11, 2005, in exercise of their rights as provided for under the Constitution of the Republic of Liberia.

They said their declarations of intent were thereafter supported and endorsed by several thousand qualified registered voters but they were treated with "latitude and careless abandonment" by NEC. They said while the Commission held regular weekly meetings with political parties, the commission only met with them twice for familiarization meeting on July 8, 2005 and the second on July 16, 2005 during a workshop at the YMCA building.

Neither did NEC acknowledge receipt of a communication from Independent Candidates since the commencement of the process, their complaint said. "This circumstance denied the independent candidates their rights and opportunity to regularly consult and relate with the Commission, in clear violation of the Appellants' constitutional rights to equal access and treatment from the Respondent Commission, as it did and has been doing with the political parties in these elections processes," the court heard.

The independent candidates were stunned on August 12, 2005 when NEC called them by telephone to report to the security desk and "receive a very important letter" which turned out to be notices of rejection of their nomination applications served on them by NEC for various reasons. The candidates said those reasons, which, included failure to meet the required number of registered voters "were vague" and in gross violation of their constitutional rights to due process of law to be heard before being condemned.

They said they were at a loss as to which counties and by what number of their counties listing had failed to meet the alleged requirements of the Commission. They said they were not given the opportunity to correct any of the alleged defects (if any) on their documentations, as required under NEC's own guidelines, and as the commission did with political parties and others.

NEC permitted and allowed political parties the right to make amendments and/or corrections on any defects on their applications, but denied the same right to independent candidates in a flagrant violation of the Commission's Guidelines, and of the electorates' constitutional rights to freely choose their leaders, the candidates alleged.

They submitted that the Commission violated the Constitution by employing double standards in dealing with participants/candidates in these elections, thereby clearly indicating that NEC's playing field is not level between the Independent candidates and the political parties.

Therefore, they said NEC commissioners "must resign or be replaced to avoid another round of violence, because the Commission has commenced cheating one group in favor of another group already."

They also charged that NEC "constantly changed the rules and guidelines during the period of voters exercise and the nomination process to the disadvantage of independent candidates to the effect that the said independent candidates were only given three weeks within which, to secure the required number of registered voters signatures, the same being a total of (6000) Six Thousand registered voters from not less than (12) Twelve counties in the Republic, in utter disregard to the prevailing conditions in the country, specifically the security, the weather, and the deplorable road conditions."

"While on the contrary, political parties were given several months to accomplish less stringent requirements than appellants herein. Appellants contend that the Respondent having demonstrated partially in this electoral process again the independent candidates and their supporters, the Respondents credibility to conduct a free, fair and impartial elections is now questionable, in that, the Respondent Commission has demonstrated its inability to carry out its mandate in conducting a free, fair, and democratic elections on a level playing field in Liberia, as mandated by the CPA, the Constitution of the Republic of Liberia, the Elections law of the Republic of Liberia, the Electoral Reform Law of 2004 and the guidelines of the Respondent as well as internationally accepted standards on elections matters and this lack of credibility on the part of Respondent, must therefore, be remedied by the removal and replacement of the members of the Respondent Commission to avoid violence and confusion in the process, to which unconstitutionall and reversible decision of the National Elections Commission, Appellants excepted and appealed."

They then asked the court to grant them relief by reversing the decisions of NEC in their favor.

But NEC filed a 17 count Returns praying the Court to deny and dismiss the rejected candidates' appeal. NEC said the candidates had each accepted and submitted themselves to the electoral rules and procedures. It said they "suffer lashes and waiver in their attempt to challenge the identical rules which govern the electoral process."

NEC denied that the rejected candidates "were treated with levitude and careless abandonment by NEC." NEC contended that every effort was exerted "to ensure equal treatment to all political parties and independent candidates contesting the October 11, 2005 elections.

NEC said "assuming without admitting that the Appellants herein were not treated in a fair manner that will ensure a level playing field, the appellants suffered lashes and waiver under the law for their failure and neglect to timely challenge the National Elections Commission and bring it to book to ensure that they act correctly. For the Appellants to quietly accept all the rules and guidelines laid down by the Appelle Elections Commission including the Electoral Reform Law but only elect to cry foul when they are being rejected for failure to meet up with mandatory requirements is unfair and unjust to the Respondent/Appelle."

NEC said it strictly complied with the 1986 Elections Law, Electoral Reform Law of 2004 and the Guidelines Relating to the Registration of Political Parties and Independent Candidates and all other relevant laws. "The Appelle says it sees no deviation on its part form the above laws and guidelines."

NEC submitted that the candidates were all entitled to the benefit of section 19.3 and 19.5 of the Guidelines Relating to the Registration of Political Parties and Independent Candidates which offer an opportunity for correction of missing/incomplete records within seven (7) days.

"However, the Appellants could not take advantage of this opportunity because all of them submitted their documents to the screening committee at the very dead end of the time allotted for such exercise. The Appellants having waited for the very last minute before submitting the documents for scrutiny, they in effect, denied themselves the opportunity of making any correction. Hence, count three (3) of the Bill of Exception should be overruled and the entire appeal dismissed."

According to NEC, a random screening conducted by the commission's data center shows that certain percentages of the total number of registered voters submitted by each independent candidate were invalid thereby reducing the number of registered voters less than the minimum required. NEC attached a facsimile of each Applicant/Appellant's total number of registered voters submitted and the number of invalid registered voters discovered marked NEC/1 to form a cogent part of these Returns."

Regarding candidate D. Garkpe Gedepoh, he was reported to have applied to NEC to run as independent presidential candidate. He submitted his documents for scrutiny, but his Vice President running mate, Sylvester Singbe "failed, refused and neglected to submit his documentation in clear violation of NEC's Guidelines and relevant laws, NEC told the court. "D. Garkpe Gedepoh could not have contested the presidency without a vice presidential candidate. Consequently, he was rejected in line with the approved Guidelines Relating to the Registration of Political and Independent Candidates," NEC told the court and asked it to overrule the entire appeal.

NEC rejected claims by the candidates that it has "employed double standards in dealing with political parties and independent candidates or denied the independent candidates the right to correct their documentation."

The opportunity for correction of amendment of documentation was provided across the board, but had to be exercised within the time frame. "For example, independent candidates who submitted their documents more than seven (7) days to the deadline set for the closure of nomination and whose documents were incorrect were advised and they corrected or amended their documents. But the Appellants herein took the risk of submitting their documents in less than seven (7) days to the closure of the deadline set for nomination. In such case they denied themselves the opportunity to re-submit their document if found to be defective. Hence, count five (5) and the totality of the appeal should be overruled and dismissed."

NEC said the Elections of 2005 is time-bound by the Constitution and the Comprehensive Peace Agreement. Consequently, NEC produced and published an Electoral Time Line "which is fixed and necessary for a successful free, fair and transparent Democratic Elections. The timeline and the Guidelines relating to registration of Political Parties and Independent Candidates have been with the Appellants for months unchallenged. Hence, the Appellants suffered lashes and waiver for issues belatedly raised as to different time and standards for political parties and independent candidates."

In a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court decided to dispose of the first issue - whether or not in fairness to the Independent Candidates, NEC give them the same or equal opportunities given to Political Parties in the Elections process. "This Court has carefully reviewed the Guidelines relating to the Registration of Political Parties and Independent Candidates promulgated by the National Elections Commission on 17 January 2005.

From a careful analysis, the court said it did not appear as if Independent Candidates were given equal opportunities as were given to the Political Parties. Citing an example, the court said, one of the registration requirements laid down by the NEC for Independent Candidates is that the Petition List must be signed by "Registered Voters", from each of at least 12 Counties (could not be possible before registration of voters), while NEC's requirement for Political Parties to canvas for members could begin before Proposed Political Parties were even registered with the Commission; and the Proposed Political Parties were only required, under Section 8.1 (b) of the Guidelines, to present to NEC a notarized membership list of not less than five hundred (500) "eligible voters" from of at least 12 counties under Section 2, subsection 2.1 (c) in defining political parties, required proposed or new political party to provide five hundred (500) qualified voters in at least 12 counties in the country, while existing parties were to have five hundred (500) qualified voter in at least six (6) counties in the Country.

"This means that as noted above, the registration process for Independent Candidates started after the completion of Voters Registration and publication of the Voters Registration List by the NEC. Voters Registration was not completely finished and published until June 30, 2005