Ahead of the 2019 general elections, the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC has lamented the proliferation of conflicting judgments arising from pre-election and post-election cases which affect the electoral process negatively.
INEC revealed that there have been over 1,200 cases involving the Commission since the 2015 general elections and it has not disobeyed any court order but only appeals them in the interest of justice where it is considered necessary.
Mahmood Yakubu, INEC Chairman gave this indication Monday in his remarks during a workshop for Justices and Judges on Electoral matters at the National Judicial Institute, Abuja.
Yakubu who was represented by INEC National Commissioner for Legal Matters, May Agbamuche – Mbu noted that conflicting judgements, especially by courts of coordinate jurisdiction at the High Court level are putting the Commission in a very difficult position and creating uncertainty in the process.
The INEC Chairman representative explained that the court in one judicial division may order the Commission on a particular course of action only to be contradicted by another court of coordinate jurisdiction from another division or even within the same division on the same subject matter.
According to Agbamuche-Mbu, “conflicting court orders are negatively affecting the consistency, neutrality, and public perception, not only of the Commission, but the Judiciary as well. There is therefore the urgent need to address the issue of conflicting judgements in order to engender certainty in the electoral process.
“Our second area of concern relates to the lack of consequential Orders by the Courts after making findings on an issue and stating the position. In such cases, the Commission is compelled to take a position relying on previous decisions of the Court on the subject. This in some cases made the Commission appear inconsistent and has also led to protracted litigation.
“Closely related to this, is the issue of Orders to maintain the status quo by the Court without stating the exact status quo intended. This has given room to parties to misinterpret the Order to suit their purpose, thereby knowingly causing confusion and controversy”.
She added that, “the inevitable disputes that arise in the course of democratic elections are adjudicated by the Judiciary. This means that there is no democracy without the rule of law and there is no rule of law without the Judiciary. It is for this reason that the independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) considers this Workshop necessary in the best interest of our democracy”.
In a key note address, Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria, Ibrahim Muhammad warned Judges handling election cases to guide their integrity and that of the Judiciary by avoiding acts that will bring them under the disciplinary jurisdiction of the National Judicial Council as it will not hesitate to wield the big stick of sanctions to any Judicial Officer found wanting in the discharge of his or her duties.
Muhammad who represented by the President Court of Appeal, Zainab Bulkachuwa stressed that, ” it is important that the Judiciary maintain absolute independence. Judges should handle election petitions without any eternal pressure or influence either by political parties, stakeholders or economic interest groups.
“The Judiciary must continue to take steps to ensure that it is not seen as being partisan but must always demonstrate manifest integrity in its adjudicatory processes. Consequently, Judicial Officers serving on election petition tribunals must note that judgments must not be ambiguous and should be devoid of any form of external influence. Your Lordships should shun unnecessary associations with lawyers who may be acting as conduits for politicians no matter how innocent they may be portrayed.
