http://allafrica.com/stories/200804250180.html
Nigeria: Reflections On Abia Governorship Tribunal Judgment
Vanguard (Lagos)
COLUMN
24 April 2008
Posted to the web 25 April 2008
K. H. C. Nwokolo
Lagos
A lot has been written and said about the judgment of the Abia State
Governorship Tribunal. Perhaps we should praise the tribunal for
attracting
so much attention but that is normally the attributes of a bad judgement".
I was constrained to read Nnamdi Nwokocha-Ahaaiwe's response published in
The Guardian of Tuesday April 1st to Prof. Itse Sagay's reasoning or
commentary on the said judgement published in the Vanguard newspaper of
March 12, 2008.
In a nutshell, I consider Nwokocha-Ahaaiwe's reasoning cosmetic, faulty
and
erroneous and his language was to some extent unjustifiably discourteous
and
disrespectful. It is not my intention to join issues with Nwokocha-Ahaaiwe
but I appreciate that it may well be inevitable if I were to meaningfully
comment on the said judgment.
Onyema Ugochukwu
On the 5th day of February 2008, the National Assembly/Governorship and
Legislative Houses Election Tribunal sitting in Umuahia Abia State
declared
the Petitioner, Chief Onyeama Ugochukwu the duly elected Governor of Abia
State, on the premise that Chief T. .A. Orji, the incumbent Governor and
the
open winner of the April 14 election was not a qualified person to contest
the said election, having not resigned his employment with Abia State
Government, secondly for allegedly being a member of secret society "the
Okija Shrine".
Beside academic qualification, the only other qualification required to
qualify one to contest an election is that the person is sponsored by his
political party. This presupposes that it is the political party that
screens the candidate and presents him for an election. Before the
election,
the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had assumed the duty
of
disqualifying candidates for elections but the then Vice President Atiku
Abubakar, presidential candidate of the Action Congress challenged
INEC in court and won. In that instance, it was decided by the court that
only a court of competent jurisdiction can disqualify a candidate from
contesting an election. Hence Atiku Abubakar stood for the election even
though INEC failed to accommodate him and his party in like manner as
other
political parties. Before he stood for the elections, Chief T.A. Orji was
not disqualified by a court of competent jurisdiction.
The case against him by the EFCC in the Federal High Court, Lagos was a
mere
accusation of fraud that has remained unsubstantiated by a court verdict.
The issues of his non resignation of employment and his alleged membership
of a secret society were not raised or submitted to a competent court for
adjudication before the election.
Though the election tribunal has the power to disqualify a candidate whose
election is questioned after he has won, the Tribunal has to treat the
matter judiciously and judicially, duly considering public interest, to
avoid a situation that would breach the rights of the citizens to elect
their leaders,. In the instance case, the declaration of Chief Onyema
Ugochukwu by the Election Tribunal as the winner of the April 14, 2007
gubernatorial election when he did not score the highest votes is an
infringement on the right of the people of Abia State to vote for a
candidate of their choice. It means in effect, that people do not matter
according to the honourable tribunal.
But by the rules, democracy is built around the people, their inalienable
rights to elect leaders by universal adult franchise. It does not sound
legal and logical to declare a man with less votes the winner of an
election. Hence I am in agreement with Olisa Agbakaba (SAN) though not
surprisingly, Nwokocha Ahaaiwe faults his reasoning. How tenable are the
grounds on which Chief T.A Orji's participation in the elections was
nullified by disqualification. As earlier stated, the premises are two
folds:
(a)That he did not resign his employment with Abia State Government
(b)That he is a member of a secret society "the Okija Shrine."
RESIGNATION FROM EMPLOYMENT
While not holding brief for Chief T.A. Orji, I posit that the evidence on
which the tribunal based its finding did not meet the required standard of
proof. The allegation of non resignation of employment is not a subject to
be decided on probability of evidence; but beyond reasonable doubt. This
is
because by nature, it creates a crime of fraud against the government of
Abia State in that it presupposes that Chief T.A. Orji and his running
mate
were at the time and even till date still drawing salaries from Abia State
by reason of being Chief of Staff and Commissioner respectively. So even
as
they sit today as Governor and Deputy Governor of Abia State, they are
still
enjoying their salaries and benefits of office as Chief of Staff and
Commissioner.
It means that they are taking double salary and enjoying double benefits
which is fraudulent. When an allegation that borders on fraud is made, the
standard of proof is beyond reasonable doubt and not probability of
evidence
as the tribunal held. Assuming that Chief T.A Orji failed to join issues
with the petitioner at the Tribunal, would such elevate a mere allegation
of
not resigning from employment as made by the Petitioner to be standard of
proof beyond reasonable doubt? My answer is No; this is because an
unchallenged assertion or evidence on itself is no proof of the assertion
when the evidence is manifestly unreliable.
|
