By Chidi Odinkalu
As he settled in to deliver the judgment of the Edo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal on 2 April 2025, presiding judge, Wilfred Kpochi, felt obliged to get one ritual out of the way. Glancing left and right, he asked each of his two colleagues on the three-person tribunal to confirm that the judgment he was about to deliver was unanimous. Justice Kpochi only proceeded after each, one to his left and the other to his right, nodded their affirmation.
The judge had good reason for this preliminary ritual. 48 hours before it was due, a leaked document purporting to be the judgment of the tribunal went into circulation.
Ahead of judgment day, both leading parties in the electoral contest which had inexorably mutated into a judicial one – the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the All Progressives Congress (APC) – felt compelled to issue duelling statements denouncing the leak and blaming the other for it. The APC claimed that “the PDP leaked a fake judgment, knowing they would lose”, while the PDP “accused the APC of using the leaked fake document to gauge public reaction.”The leaked document suggested that the tribunal would deliver
a split verdict, with one of the three judges dissenting from the majority of
two who were supposed to decide against the petition of the PDP and its
candidate, Asue Ighodalo. When, therefore, the presiding judge asked his
colleagues to affirm that the judgment was unanimous, he sought to telegraph
that tales of the leak of their judgment were unfounded or, in any case, had
misdescribed the decision of the tribunal. Instead of a split decision
suggested by the leak, this was a unanimous court.
This was far from the first time that the decision of an
election petition tribunal in Nigeria would be foreshadowed by suggestions or
allegations of a leak ahead of its delivery.
At the onset of presidentialism in
Nigeria in 1979, the contest between Shehu Shagari of the National Party of
Nigeria (NPN) and Obafemi Awolowo of the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) ended up
before the presidential election tribunal. On 20 August 1979, Obafemi Awolowo filed his
petition against the declaration of Shehu Shagari as the winner of the
election. The following day, military ruler, General Olusegun Obasanjo, invited
Atanda Fatayi Williams to the Dodan Barracks (as the seat of government then in
Lagos was called) and offered him the office of the Chief Justice of Nigeria
(CJN).
Fatayi
Williams’ first task was to adjudicate Chief Awolowo’s petition. The military
had committed to handing over power on 1 October, a mere 40 days later. General
Obasanjo, who was overseeing arrangements for a high profile handover to an
elected successor, was anxious to know that the Supreme Court would not torpedo
his plans. It was credibly
suspected that
he received the necessary assurances from his hand-picked CJN well ahead of the
judgment.
In March 2008,
Action Congress (AC), the party then led by Bola Ahmed Tinubu, vigorously
alleged that the outcome of the presidential election petition challenging the
announcement of Umaru Musa Yar’Adua of the PDP as the winner of the 2007
presidential election, had leaked. Lai Mohammed, the spokesperson of the party
at the time, denounced the leak, proclaiming that the judgment would
“not stand the test of time.”
Fifteen years later,
as the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal issued a 48-hour notice of the
delivery of its judgment on 4 September 2023, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the candidate
of the APC, whose announcement on 1 March as the winner of the presidential election
was under challenge, departed for New Delhi, India, to attend the G-20 Summit.
He arrived in India on 5 September, the day before the judgment, guaranteeing that he was going to be
outside the country when the tribunal delivered its judgment. Many people
believed that Tinubu travelled to India with the confidence of a man who had
been assured ahead of schedule of the outcome that the tribunal would announce
the day after he landed in India.
Whether these allegations were true
in any specific case is a subject for another day. Far from diminishing over
the years, however, credible suspicions of breach of the deliberative
confidentiality of judicial decision-making in election disputes and political
cases in Nigeria have grown. They enjoy high credulity with the public, an
indication of a deep-seated deficit of credibility that now clearly afflicts
the business of what judges do in political and electoral disputes in Nigeria.
At
the valedictory session of the 9th Senate in June 2023, Adamu Bulkachuwa, the
senator for Bauchi North, confirmed suspicions of unconscionably intimate dalliances
between judges and politicians when he appreciated his colleagues “whom (sic) have come to me and sought for my help
when my wife was the President of the Court of Appeal.” Senator Bulkachuwa did
not forget to thank his wife “whose freedom and independence I encroached upon
while she was in office…. She has been very tolerant and accepted my
encroachment and extended her help to my colleagues.” His wife, Zainab, was
President of the Court of Appeal from 2014 to 2020.
For
insisting on calling attention to this kind of criminal acccessorisation of
judges, Nyesom Wike, the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory who is also
a member of Nigeria’s Body of Benchers (BoB), invited the grandees of the BoB
who visited him in his office at the end of last month to dispense with basic
niceties of process and “punish” me. His 36
minute-long harangue to
the old men and women of the BoB who were his guests, was occasionally
punctuated with enthusiastic applause belying the average age of the group as
well as the kind of undisguised ridicule which they had to endure for both
themselves and the institutions of the judicial process in Nigeria. Such
cravenness from the leadership of the self-described “body of practitioners of the highest
distinction in the legal profession in Nigeria”, bodes ill for judicial
credibility and independence.
As Mr. Wike was busy meeting with
them, an advocate who had spent his life campaigning against that tendency took
a characteristically unpretentious leave.
Raised
in Agbor, Delta state, by a father who was a high school teacher from Imo
State, Joseph Otteh was one of the first two colleagues whom I engaged in the
legal directorate of the Civil Liberties Organisation (CLO) in Lagos in 1991.
He brought tremendous integrity, intellect, and industry to the role, and had
remarkable reserves of empathy.
In
1999, Joe founded the group Access
to Justice “to
work towards rebuilding the institutional credibility of the Nigerian legal and
justice system, restoring public faith in its institutions.” He approached that
task with both courage and single-mindedness, doing a lot of good along the way.
Joe
epitomised the lawyer as a gentleman and professional of civic virtue. On 28
March, he succumbed reportedly to complications from Diabetes,
leaving behind an aged mother, wife and three children.
30 years ago, in 1995, Joe authored a
defining study of the customary court system in the 17 states of southern
Nigeria under the title The Fading Lights of Justice. As an advocate, Joseph Otteh did his utmost to
ensure that those lights were kept aflame. That title could only have come from
a man who was well ahead of his time and had the acuity to see the future. The
Heavens will be enriched by the acquisition of this incredible angel.
*A lawyer and a teacher, Odinkalu can be reached at chidi.odinkalu@tufts.edu
No comments:
Post a Comment