BY AUSTIN UGANWA
Imo State is a patent study in vast and sustained election petitions.
And this is incontrovertible. The six times general elections have been
conducted in the country since the advent of the Fourth Republic
political dispensation in 1999 Imo has evidently been festooned as a
state with a high volume of election petitions.
This was further underpinned by the President of the Court of Appeal,
Justice Zainab Bulkachuwa while inaugurating elections petitions
tribunals May 14th 2019 in Abuja. She stated that Imo State had the
highest number of election petitions filed in the aftermath of the 2019
general elections. In specific terms, Bulkachuwa submitted that out of a
total of number of 786 petitions filed by the applicants in the 36
states including the Federal Capital Territory, 76 of them emanated from
Imo State alone. On average, Imo petitions were three times over and
above any other state.
She revealed that the heightened number of election petitions that
stemmed from Imo informed the Appeal Court’s decision to treat the
state differently. According to her, instead of deploying two to three
panels as it was the case of most other states, six panels were raised
for Imo so as to ensure that the cases were adequately handled. Imo
situation is thus considered reprehensible especially when juxtaposed
with other states such as Jigawa State that did not have any election
petition
Imo scored another infamous first at the Appeal Court. It was the only
state with three petitions seeking the setting aside of the tribunal
judgment that affirmed the election of the sitting Governor Emeka
Ihedioha. The Appeal court which is currently churning out judgments
in quick successions on election petitions brought before it so as to
meet the 60-day limit provided by the 2010 Electoral Act and the 1999
constitution as amended turned down their requests and endorsed the
tribunal’s decision.
Obviously, the cyclical vast volume of elections petitions in Imo has
intrinsically become an organic structure of the state. Instance
abounds in the 2007 governorship election in the state when the elected
governor at the time, Ikedi Ohakim had a whopping 19 petitions against
him by his opponents. Key among his petitioners were: Senator Ifeanyi
Araruma who was People’s Democratic Party (PDP) candidate and Chief
Martin Agbaso, All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA). The final
judgment on the petitions by the Supreme Court dragged into the tail end
of Ohakim’s four-year tenure.
Imo was typically at it again after this year’s general elections. No
fewer than 11 petitions were at inception of the tribunal sitting in
Owerri, brought against Rt. Hon. Emeka Ihedioha, who was declared winner
of the governorship election by the Independent National Electoral
Commission (INEC). Indeed, the highest number of petitions against any
elected governor in the country.
Curiously, all the three major opponents of Ihedioha in the March 9,
2019 governorship election raised petitions against him, alleging
electoral malpractices and failure to secure one-quarter votes in
two-thirds local councils in the state. They are: Uche Nwosu, Action
Alliance, Senator Ifeanyi Arararume, All Progressives Grand Alliance and
Senator Hope Uzodinma, All Progressives Congress. While Ararume is
seeking that the election be cancelled and a fresh one conducted, Nwosu
wants both rerun and to be declared winner. Uzodinma who was placed a
distant fourth after the election also bizarrely wishes the court to
adjudge him winner.
This piece was not designed to disparage genuinely aggrieved candidates
who approach the court to seek redress over election issues as the
judiciary still remains the bastion of those who are wronged by ensuring
that justice is dispensed. This narrative is rather geared towards
discouraging frivolous election petitions that result in wasting the
precious resources of the tribunal and courts and also restrain the pace
of development of the affected state. This is unfortunately where Imo
has found itself in a wrong ring of history. Accordingly, the position
of the law on the petitions brought against Ihedioha as established by
the tribunal and the Appeal Court underscore this submission.
In their separate rulings both the tribunal and Appeal Court submitted
that the petitions of Nwosu, Ararume and Uzodinma were based on hearsay
and therefore lacked merit given their failure to back their claims with
evidence. “Hearsay evidence is not admissible in court,” the Appeal
Court emphasized. This explains the frivolous nature of the petitions
and the reason why the state has become a laughing stock in the sphere
of other states. This finds further authentication in the fact that
Nigeria law system and court processes are anchored fundamentally on
nothing but hard evidence.
Against the above background, it is only plausible to observe that
having declared the result of an election, it is presumed that the
result so declared by INEC is correct, valid and authentic and has
satisfied the conditions stipulated in the constitution and Electoral
Act. The onus therefore lies on the petitioner to prove otherwise based
on evidence; else the appellant is merely pursuing shadow.
It is indeed unassailable that vast, constant and sustained election
petitions are inherently unfavorable and unhealthy to any state. Former
governor Ohakim who once wore the shoe and knew where it pinched has on
a number of occasions driven this point home, advising Ihedioha
opponents to sheath their sword for the interest of the state.
“Continuing with the court cases would be inimical to the progress of
the state. It would scare away development partners and other investors
because investors do not invest where there are litigations. The
numerous litigations I faced were the reason why the foreign partners
for the refinery project located at Ohaji/Egbema Local Government Area
pulled out”, he revealed.
DR. AUSTIN UGANWA, SENIOR SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO IMO GOVERNMENT ON
DOCUMENTATION WROTE FROM OWERRI