Falana slams INEC

0

Popular Lagos lawyer and human rights activist, Mr Femi Falana (SAN) has lashed at the nation’s electoral umpire, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), describing it is as incapable of conducting the 2015 general elections billed to hold in February.

“It is indisputable that the INEC is not in a position to conduct credible general election between now and 2015.

Notwithstanding the assurance of Professor Jega that the costly mistakes of the recent past would not be repeated in 2015, the INEC has not been purged of the officials who have been indicted by several election petition tribunals and courts for involvement in electoral malpractice since 2013,” falana stated.

The electoral body had, last week, released the timetable for the 2015 general elections, indicating that the presidential, governorship and legislative elections had been scheduled to hold on February 14 and 28, 2015.

But Falana, who certified INEC unfit to conduct the polls, while delivering a paper at a national stakeholders forum on electoral reform in Abuja, also urged the National Assembly to amend the Electoral Act in a way that would warrant the commission to conduct the elections in December 2014.

According to him, “since INEC is required by section 25 of the Electoral Act to appoint a date not earlier than 150 days and not later than 30 days to the expiration of the tenure of office holders the National Assembly should amend the Electoral Act to enable the INEC to conduct the elections in December 2014.”

He added that if the amendment was effected, there would be a period of 180 days to deal with election petitions, even as he noted, however, that “if the law is not amended the timetable should be reviewed to allow all the elections to hold in one day during the first week of January 2015.”

With this, he observed, there will be not less than 4 months to prosecute petitions arising from the elections.

Besides insisting that INEC was not in a position to conduct the 2015 polls, Falana said the electoral body was yet to comply with section 10 of the Electoral Act by perpetually refusing to compile and update the country’s voter register.

His words: “Apart from allowing such criminal elements to subvert the democratic process the INEC has refused to comply with section 10 of the Electoral Act which requires it to compile and update the national voters’ register on a continuous basis.
But in defiance of the law the INEC prefers to engage in periodic registration and review of voters register on the eve of elections.

“Even though the INEC has admitted that the voters register is defective in many respects Professor Jega has said that it has the required integrity to be used for any election in the country.
(Nigeria Tribune, December 9, 2013).

Since the voters register has become a template for rigging elections Nigerians should compel the INEC to put in place a mechanism for continuous registration of voters.”

To buttress his point that INEC was morally unfit to conduct the 2015 elections, Falana cited three gubernatorial elections conducted in Edo, Ondo and Delta States from 2012-2014 by the commission as instances.

“The woeful performance of INEC in the staggered elections in the 3 states has questioned the preparedness of INEC to conduct credible election in 2015.

The Edo State governorship election of July 14, 2012 was almost marred by lack of adequate voting materials.

?In fact, one of the candidates was compelled to collect the telephone numbers of the top officials of the INEC who were in the State for the election, called them and threatened to set the people after them if any voter was disenfranchised”, he observed.

The legal luminary lamented that, while Section 87 of the Electoral Act required political parties to conduct primaries or elect candidates by consensus in order to stop the imposition of candidates by political godfathers and money bags, the lack of internal democracy had resulted in party leaders imposing candidates or substitute them at will.

He said, “Since candidates who have been shortchanged have the right to challenge the decisions of their political parties not less than 300 pre-election cases were filed before the 2011 general election.

Some of the cases are still pending in the appellate courts.”

On prosecution of election petitions, Falan said, “Since 2003 Nigeria has continued to record the highest number of election petitions in the world. The number of petitions rose to about 1,500 in 2007.

Based on the change of the leadership of the INEC in 2010 coupled with the compulsory deposit of N400,000 ty petitioners the number of petitioners was reduced to about 500 in 2011.

“Unlike other countries where election petitions are tried within days or weeks they are allowed to drag on for years in Nigeria. There are indications that some of the petitions filed in 2011 are not going to be concluded before the 2015 general election. The reasons for the anomaly are not farfetched.

“Contrary to section 159 of the Electoral Act, 2006 which requires the INEC to grant access to election materials to litigants the INEC is in the habit of frustrating the inspection of voting materials by petitioners. In the process, petitioners are forced to apply to election petition tribunals to compel INEC to comply with the law.

?Even where orders are granted for inspection, they are treated with disdain by the INEC in a bid to cover up electoral malpractice.

“It is our submission that applications filed in courts for inspection of election materials are no longer necessary as it has become a criminal offence under the Electoral Act and Freedom of Information Act to deny access to official records”.

On the part of judges manning election tribunals and appellate courts, Falana regretted that they allow litigants and counsel to engage in dilatory tactics while the judicial system permits all kinds of interlocutory appeals, most of which are designed to frustrate the hearing of election petitions.

He said, “Thus, in the skewed interpretation of section 285 of the Constitution the Supreme Court has decided that any petition not heard within 180 days on account of interlocutory appeals has lapsed. In other words, petition alleging serious electoral malfeasance is not likely to be heard and determined if the INEC and the other respondents (who may have rigged the election) decide to exercise their right of filing preliminary objections and interlocutory appeals.

“The tribunals and the courts also apply undue technicalities in the resolution of election disputes. In the process the judiciary has continued to contribute to the subversion of the electoral process.

In some instances, petitions alleging grave electoral malpractices riggers on the ground that the petitions were not proved beyond reasonable doubt.

In other cases, election petitions were decided on the balance of probability or substantial compliance with the Electoral Act. The electoral process has been so discredited to the extent that decisions of courts are now substituted for the mandate of the electorate.

“Another delay was corruptly introduced to the judicial system in 2011 when a handful of senior judges and lawyers decided to have a bite at the cherry.

Before then appeals arising from governorship election petitions, like legislative elections, terminated at the Court of Appeal. But under the pretext that the Court of Appeal had delivered some conflicting judgments on election related matters the Constitution was amended to allow appeals from governorship elections to terminate at the Supreme Court.

Since then the Supreme Court has been congested with appeals arising from gubernatorial elections.”

Send your news stories to [email protected] Follow News Ghana on Google News

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here