Agbaso and Ohakim and the Appeals Courts
By McLord Obioha
Of all the election cases that the Nigerian judiciary tackled, none was and continues to be more hydra-headed than that of Imo. It will definitely go down in the history of Nigerian law as very challenging and most complicated.
Although Ohakim may have easily 'scaled through' in his case with Araraume by technicalities of law, he may not find it easy with the hurdle he faces in his case against Agbaso. I took time to speak to some of Nigeria's best legal minds and from what I am hearing, it appears that his case with Agbaso may not be a cakewalk even with this 'latest revelation' by this Osita Chiagorom that the actual reason behind the cancellation of the 4/14/07 election by INEC was the mismatch of Araraume and Ugwu's photographs.
From my analysis, here's the kernel of how this matter would eventually be decided:
(1) 'When did INEC know about this photo mismatch'?
(2) If it knew about it earlier, 'why did it still go ahead with the 4/14/07 election'?
(3) Did it have enough time to make changes or corrections?
(4) If it did not not make changes then, why did it go ahead and conduct an election only to turn around and cancel its result?
(5) And if it found it necessary to go on with the election after it was satisfied that the arrangement, preparation (photo, etc.) it made was appropriate, can it go back and cancel the result of that election with the flimsy reason or excuse of photo mismatch?
(6) Was that cancellation by implication not an acceptance that its preparation was flawed?
(7) Does INEC really have the power to cancel an election anyway? Part IV, Section 27 Subsection 1 clearly states inter alia: "Where a date has been appointed for the holding of an election, and there is reason to believe that a serious breach of peace is likely to occur if the election is proceeded with on that date or it is impossible to conduct the election as a result of natural disasters or other emergencies, the commission may postpone the election and shall in respect of the area, or areas concerned, appoint another date for the holding of the postponed election." Folks, this power is clearly for INEC to postpone an election about to happen, not one already held. I have taken to read the Electoral Law. No where in that law did it give INEC the power to cancel an already held election.
(8) How did this mistake by INEC affect voting on 4/14/07 vis a vis the number of votes cast or received by each of the candidates?
(9) To what extent was this photo mix up? Was it widespread or prevalent in few local governments?
(10) What is the number of votes cast for Agbaso as against that of Ararume or Ohakim?
(11) Why did INEC choose 4/28/07 instead of one week after the 4/14/07 which should be 4/21/08 as the Electoral law provides?
(12) Was the delay premeditated or deliberate so as to give undue advantage to a failing, unpopular candidate?
(13) Finally, how did this so called violence which INEC said was the main reason behind cancellation of the gubernatorial election affect only the governorship election and not the House of Assembly election which was held on the same day? Could it be that the rioters or the thugs allowed voters to vote for the Assembly men and women and not for the governorship? Please!
These are the issue folks. If Nigerian judges do their work without their palms being greased as has always been the case in Nigeria, Ohakim and INEC are in for a very rough time.
By the way, there's another argument making rounds in Imo State today. That is, "If Agbaso knew that he won 4/14/07, why did he participate in the 4/28/07 election?" Well, how many people asking this question know that INEC told Agbaso to participate in the next election? I was opportune to interview some inside sources within Agbaso's Legal team. An impeccable source in that camp told me that Agbaso simply followed INEC's directive afterall it is supposed to be an unbiased umpire in that election. The question now remains, if INEC led him into this illegality, what would have happened if he disobeyed that order? The court wil first determine if INEC was wrong in the first place and then question why did it choose to mislead or misdirect a candidate. Some legal minds rightly argue that one does not jump into Brooklyn bridge if prodded to do so. But consider the difference here. If one is told to jump into Brooklyn bridge, one can elect to obey or resist such order because it does not come with benefits. But this is election and its enormous benefit is victory. Imagine what INEC would have said if Agbaso failed to obey its directive or order. Remember what happens when a police officer misdirects traffic. Or what happens to a driver who disobeys that police order. Given the situation on hand at that time, Agbaso did the right thing. It's left for the court to separate the chaff from the corn. This is what makes the difference between a good lawyer and an ambulance chaser. Good a thing, both teams have good lawyers. Let's stop worrying and leave the learned minds to slug it out. Let's see what happens on the decision day.
One thing is sure, Agbaso/Ohakim case is like no other. It's not the same as what happened in Plateau state as Chiagorom stated.
McLord Obioha.
Publisher.
THE NIGERIAN Newsmagazine & AFRICAN NEWSREEL, The Newspaper.
New York, New York.
