Now May Rivers Know Peace (1) …On Bickering Over Supreme Court Ruling

Wike and Amaechi

Long before the Supreme Court delivered its landmark judgment upholding the election of Rivers State Governor Nyesom Wike a duly elected, many believed that the concurrent decisions of the Governorship Election Tribunal and that of the Court of Appeal fell short of acceptable legal standards. The major reason for that conclusion was that the Apex Court had earlier ruled on a similar matter involving the Lagos State governorship elections, which placed greater premium on the voters register than the smart card reader.
Normally, once the Supreme Court takes a position on an issue of law, it becomes a reference point and indeed a guiding rule for the lower courts, which are duty-bound to uphold such judgments. But how same did not apply in the case of the petition filed against Governor Wike’s election by the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its candidate, Dr Dakuku Peterside was baffling.
From the change of guards in the original Rivers State Governorship Election Tribunal, to claims of unsafe Rivers, prompting relocation to Abuja, from refusal of the PDP and indeed its candidate, Wike ample time to make their case, to the eventual annulment, a strange desperation ran through, albeit transparently.
If not that members of the Tribunal were eminent jurists and fearless judges, one would have said they were coerced into taking such a horrific decision. For instance, even after the original tribunal had expunged from the APC petition all allegations of violence, including kidnapping, ballot box snatching and intimidation, the ‘new’ tribunal still hinged its judgment substantially on those scores. Another was the elevation of the card reader over and above the valid voters register. And ignoring any protests against that stand even with mention of decided cases.
And when the Appeal Court was depended upon to declare that the Tribunal erred in law, it didn’t.  And instead did the opposite and went further to uphold the first tribunal’s judgment.
That took a dissatisfied Governor Wike to the Supreme Court which amidst all the name-dropping, mocking of the governor as ‘caretaker’, and open claims of central power by the opposition party in the state, re-affirmed its position on recent decisions in Shinkafi vs Yari and Okereke vs Umahi and held that, “in order to prove non-accreditation and over-voting, the 1st and 2nd respondents (APC) and Peterside) were bound to rely on the voters’ register in respect of all the affected local governments. The voters’ register tendered were only in respect of 11 out of 23 local governments. They were tendered from the bar. No attempt was made to link them with exhibit A-9. It is also noteworthy that forms EC8A were tendered in respect of only 16 out of 23 local government areas.” These were easy for the Tribunal and Appeal Court to note, but didn’t. That why many cried bluemurder.
In a lead judgment delivered by Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, the Supreme Court maintained (among many others) that Wike who contested the April 11, 2015 Rivers State governorship election on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) was denied fair-hearing by the lower courts.
It faulted the lower courts for improper evaluation of evidence against Wike’s election by the APC and its governorship candidate, Dakuku Peteside and also decried what it termed undue reliance of both courts on card reader.
The Supreme Court restated it position that reports from the Smart Card Reader Machines the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), used for conduct of the 2015 general elections, cannot override the Voters’ Register, which it said, has firm root in the Electoral Act, 2010 as amended.
In a unanimous decision, the seven-man panel of Justices of the Supreme Court, led by the Chief Justice of Nigeria, CJN Justice Mahmud Muhammed, last Friday said though INEC should be commended for the introduction of the Card Reader, “to booster the accuracy and transparency of the accreditation process and to maintain the democratic norm of one-man, one-vote, by detecting multiple voting by voters,  “Section 49(1) and (2) of the Electoral Act which provide for manual accreditation of voters, is a stamp and remain a vital part of our electoral law.”

Soye Wilson Jamabo