Judiciary and election petitions

The judiciary as the third arm of government could be described as a lubricant, having the capacity to calm frayed nerves and lubricate frictions in party and electoral systems. Its existence in a democratic setting is justified by the principle of separation of powers which states that people who make laws should be separate from those who implement the laws, while those who implement the laws should be separate from those that interpret those laws.

This principle, which is complemented by the principle of checks and balances, is aimed to guard against dictatorship and arbitrary rule which distinguish other forms of government from democracy. All these are necessary not only because of man’s natural tendency to abuse power, but also his capacity to arrogate to himself the power to lord it over others.

Laws as embodied in constitutions, statutes, guidelines, etc are a corollary of checks and balances which also ensure that people, including those in authority, those seeking political office, leaders and sundry citizens, don’t over-reach themselves or take undue advantage of their personality or position to the detriment of collective interests.

It is pertinent to note that the judiciary has so far, in our present political dispensation, lived up to its billing in dealing with petitions arising from the last April general elections, especially as they concern governorship, National and State Assembly elections.

We are gladdened by the speed with which these petitions were concluded at the tribunals, and we congratulate the governors of Abia, Delta and Plateau States whose elections have been upheld by the tribunals. We hope that real governance can now begin in these states as all elements of distraction appear to have been removed. We, however, have our reservations over the judicial cloud still covering the democratic and governance firmament in Rivers State where Nyeson Wike, the state governor whose election has been nullified, still sits in Government House as a tenant and landlord at the same time. 

And now that some of these petitions have moved to the Court of Appeal or Supreme Court, as the case may be, we also urge quick resolution of these cases so that the affected governors should settle down for the job which they were elected to do, because governance has been on holiday in these states.

Nigerians expect that the judiciary, at this level, should prove itself as the beacon of hope for the survival of our fledgling and fragile democracy by keeping away from the kind of role it played before and after the 2011 election when it presented itself as a democratic albatross enmeshed in corruption and frivolous injunctions.

Like most in Nigerians, it is still fresh in our minds the role of the judiciary in the macabre dance that defined the expression of interest leading to the primary election for a People’s Democratic Party (PDP) candidate for the November 16, 2013 governorship election in Anambra State which left a sour taste in the mouth.

The tacit judicial support given to a group of self-seeking individuals who defied the electoral laws that subjected every party member to the supremacy of his party was not only anti-democratic but also a sad commentary on judicial proceeding as a cash-and-carry business enterprise.

The quality, integrity and intellectual breadth of the judges who populate the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court can hardly be put to question and so, we expect that justice should not be for the highest bidder but a product of unbiased interpretation of institutional provisions and professional ethics.

Ours is a fragile democracy and so parochial or pecuniary judicial interest in political contestations and bickering should be jettisoned by those who are privileged to adjudicate in these contestations because such interests are sad reminders of inglorious past activities that subverted efforts at institutionalising democratic norms and ethos in this country.

As events unfold at both the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, we demand optimal performance from the judiciary as a necessary condition for the survival of this democracy, more so as we nurture the change mantra of the new government in the land.