3 November 2009
opinion
Benjamin Anosike — May I just respectfully suggest that money-making is the central and only driving force for which the case of Mr. Andy Uba seeking to be declared the Governor-in-waiting is really still today a matter that's even being entertained and looked at by the Courts, and NOT because the case in any way at all has any legal merits whatsoever.
The Nigerian Judges are simply delighted to have run into such uncommon "good luck" by way of stumbling upon such a "unique" man as Mr. Andy Uba, a man who is not only so extremely deep-pocketed from his Aso Rock days, as to be able (and readily willing) to shell out to the judges virtually any amounts of money they require, but is also so gullible, and so hungry and dreamy for power that he'll readily continue to spend and to spend and load their (the judges') bottomless big pockets with such huge sums, even for a case that is so patently hopeless!
Why do you think, for example, that it is ONLY concerning a case involving Mr. Andy Uba that the Nigerian Supreme Court Judges would virtually set a historic precedence and record in its entire history - entertaining one case, not once, not twice, but for a whole THREE TIMES?
But QUESTION: after all of those THREE-TIME historic trips to the Nigerian Supreme Court, did those judges rule on the case in favor of Andy Uba, in the end?
An objective and dispassionate but thorough legal analysis of the current case involving the current judges at the Enugu Appeal Court, stripped totally of just fanatical sentimentalism based on mere personal wishes, would strongly suggest to anybody who cares to be brutally honest or realistic about it, where and how this current case is bound to end up, just as well. Namely, that there just is NO provision at all for anything even remotely resembling a so-called "governor-in- waiting" in the Nigerian Constitution, and an "election" purportedly held in April 2007, some two years and seven months or so previously, does NOT even begin to qualify as a legitimate election under the Nigerian Constitution, homongous bribes to and corruption of the judges notwithstanding!
To eschew undue spinning and attempt at obfuscation, we'll try strip this of any legal mumbo jumbo and technicalities for the sake of simplicity of comprehension by almost all.
Section 178 (2) of the Nigerian Constitution, makes it clear as follows, that: "An election to the office of Governor of a State shall be held on a date not earlier than sixty days and not later than thirty days before the expiration of the term of office of the last holder of that office." For purposes of this analysis, I would assume that "the last holder" of the governorship office at issue is Gov. Peter Obi (or, is it Gov. Chris Ngige, or even C.C. Mbadunuju?). I would simply think that it has to be Gov. Obi, since he was the governor officially in office immediately preceding the April 2007 gubernatoral "elections" (or NON-elections) to which Mr. Andy Uba is laying claims. Right?
Alright, then. Now, if we assume, by mere simple logic, that the above facts are so, then it would simply follow (again by mere simple logic and calculation) , that, by the clear mandate of the Nigerian Constitution above quoted, which must be the SUPREME law for our purposes here, that any election for the governorship of Anambra State to be legally valid and legitimate, such election would have to be (or to have been) held, 30 to 60 days before March 17t, 2010 - which is the definitive date of the expiration of Gov. Obi's term in office. CLEAR ENOUGH, ISN'T IT - without the benefit of any spurious legalistic mumbo jumbo or undue spinning!
Yet, the governorship "election" (or Non-Election) out of which Andy Uba is laying his claims to entitlement to a purported "governor-in- waiting" status (a tautological but strange election creature by Uba supporters for which there is no provision anywhere in the Constitution) , is something which took place way back on April 14, 2007 - meaning, some two years and seven months or so BEFORE the expiration of Obi's term in office! A far, far, cry from 30 to 60 days BEFORE the expiration of Obi's term in office, isn't it!?
In deed, the historic ruling of the Nigerian Supreme Court of June 14, 2007, which sent Andy Uba packing and restored Peter Obi to the Awka State House, was actually quite clear on this, as it not only lambasted INEC for conducting an illegitimate April 14 elections and declaring Andy Uba the winner of the "elections," but also for what the Court called the "display of effrontery by INEC aimed at rendering nugatory the decision of the court," adding that the Court "cannot condone this kind of behaviour."
In short, without trying to read too much into the stand of the Nigerian Supreme Court on this, clearly it is apparent directly from the Court's ruling, that those justices of that apex court view the election which brought Andy Uba into power as merely a "nullity ab initio" - that is, something that is legally void and invalid right from the beginning, to the point that it could even be deemed to have not happened or taken place at all, in the first place.
To be sure, the fact that there is considerable prevalence of corruption among a handful of unscrupulous judges in the Nigerian judiciary, cannot be disputed. And in more recent years, for example, the widely respected German-based anti-corruption watch dog, the Transparency International, has rated the Nigerian Police force and the Nigerian judiciary as the number one and number four most corrupt institutions in the country, respectively. In deed, even the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Idris Legbo Kutigi, has expressed some misgivings concerning the common impression often held that the Nigerian court system is seriously infested with corruption. Speaking at the inauguration of new Federal High Court judges in July 2009, Justice Kutigo asserted: "I advise you to shun corruption and corrupt practices, .as judicial officials, you are to live above board like Creaser's wife," as he threatened henceforth to invite Nigeria's anti-corruption agencies to prosecute any corrupt judges.
Nevertheless, it is a fair statement of the facts to state that, despite such serious challenges that still remain, by and large the Nigerian judiciary has frequently risen up to the occasion and showed itself to be above board in matters of major national significance.
I am in complete agreement with one recent analyst on the matter who advised that a more prudent and more fruitful course for Andy Uba would have been for him to have "blamed his woes on INEC from whence they came" by suing that electoral body for having conducted that sham April 2007 "elections," in the first place. However, since he has chosen not to do so, but, instead, choosing to go to the Enugu Court of Appeal to "pray that he be declared the beneficiary of a fraudulent and nugatory exercise, he is only purposefully toying with the integrity of our judiciary."
Summed up simply, the point, simply, is this: That the INEC cannot, and could not have, both as a practical matter and as a matter of law (the 2006 Nigerian Electoral Law) and the Nigerian Constitution, conduct an election for an office that is not (or was not) vacant; and cannot, for the same reasons, conduct an election for an office whose tenure expires, NOT one or two months before the election (as is specifically called for by the Constitution) , but a whopping 31 months before! Pure and simple!
I'm pretty certain that the men comprising the Court panel at Enugu, are fully aware of the fact that Andy Uba has set a huge challenge and a tricky, if gigantic judicial "trap" for them. They are merely trying to "play out the game" with the super monied Andy Uba, who clearly is swimming in so big an ocean of money from his days of Obasanjo stewardship at Aso Rock, that the Justices feel themselves under such a great "pressure" to get their hands at some of that "excess" money. However, they may get their hands at some of that "excess" treasury in Andy Uba's hands. But, in the end, their verdict - in light of the facts and the evidence and the law undergirding it - is crystal clear and unmistakable.
As HONORABLE justices sworn to uphold and administer the law and the constitution, it can only be ONE verdict, in light of those factors NO "governor-in- waiting" creation! No two ways about it.
Anosike, Ph.D. wrotes in from the USA.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2009 Daily Champion. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
