By Olusegun Olanrewaju, David Lawani and Cajetan Mmuta
A recent study revealed that Nigeria recorded 6,840 post-election cases since the start of its democratic journey in 1999, marking a 100 percent increase over the years.
Action Aid International, in partnership with the Ford Foundation and the Nigerian Guild of Editors (NGE), conducted research on ‘Post-Election Judicial Accountability and Reforms in Nigeria’.
It emphasised the judiciary’s role in adjudicating these cases and suggested that poverty cannot be eradicated if the courts are complicit in enabling injustices.
The study outlines a troubling trend in Nigeria’s election litigation. Only two cases were recorded in 1999, but the number increased to 6,840 by 2023.
A breakdown of the figures shows steady growth in litigations over the years: 2003: 560 cases (8.19%); 2007: 1,290 cases (18.87%); 2011: 732 cases (10.71%); 2015: 560 cases (8.18%); 2019: 1,697 cases (24.82%); 2023: 1,996 cases (29.19%)
This alarming increase raises concerns about the judiciary’s ability to protect democracy and the potential disenfranchisement of citizens.
*Study insights and judicial concerns
The study asserts that the courts have become a potential means of disenfranchising Nigerians. It argues that, despite multiple electoral cycles since 1999, the judiciary’s recent decisions have often undermined democratic principles.
The report highlights the urgent need for judicial accountability reforms, particularly in handling electoral disputes.
The judiciary’s independence is questioned, as political actors often manipulate it to seek favourable outcomes. The report posits that until the judiciary maintains impartiality and integrity, the democratic process in Nigeria will remain compromised.
*Regulatory and institutional frameworks
The research emphasised the need for solid judicial oversight and accountability mechanisms. The judiciary operates within a complex political landscape influenced by powerful political elites, which can skew judicial independence. The study calls for interventions by civil society organizations (CSOs) and social movements to hold the judiciary accountable and ensure fair electoral processes.
*Case studies of judicial inconsistencies
The study outlines notable contradictory judgments from election tribunals, particularly from Plateau State, where different panels rendered conflicting decisions regarding the validity of party primaries.
This inconsistency raises severe doubts about the integrity of election petitions and highlights a pattern of legal ambiguity that can disenfranchise voters.
Furthermore, the case of Bashir Sheriff Machina versus Ahmed Lawan illustrates the judiciary’s retreat into technicalities rather than substantive justice.
Despite clear evidence that Lawan did not participate in the primaries, the Supreme Court’s ruling favoured him based on procedural grounds, reinforcing public cynicism toward judicial processes.
The study asserts that Nigeria’s democracy is still nascent, hindered by inadequate electoral laws and judicial reforms.
In another cited case in Plateau State, the electoral tribunal sacked some elected House of Assembly and National Assembly members on the ground that the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), to which they belonged, did not hold a valid primary election.
According to Citizens’ Action to End Poverty and Injustice (CAENI), some other panels disregarded that point and held that issues concerning a political party’s primaries were a pre-election matter and could not be raised to challenge the declared winner at an election petition tribunal (which has always been the legal position).
*Stakeholders, others back comprehensive reform to strengthen democratic institutions
Stakeholders, including lawyers and civil society advocates, emphasise the necessity for comprehensive reform to strengthen democratic institutions. They argue that without such reforms, citizens will remain disillusioned and distrustful of the electoral process.
Ben Uzuegbu, a legal practitioner and Senior Advocate in Nigeria, called for the National Assembly to prioritise electoral reforms to restore faith in the system.
He stressed that the judiciary must not dictate electoral outcomes, adding that power rests with the electorate and that the courts must uphold the people’s will.
Uzuegbu tasked members of the National Assembly with making sure the Electoral Act stands the test of time, while citizens must awaken their consciousness by making sure their votes count at all times in their effort to elect candidates of their choice.
He said, “Democracy in Nigeria has not occurred. What we are doing is autocracy because Abraham Lincoln defined democracy as the government of the people, by the people, and for the people. But what we are seeing in Nigeria does not suit that classic definition; it is government of the few, for the few, and for the benefit of the few.
“The government that we are having is not for the people, and in so far, there is a state structure, and the people are not taken into consideration like what the rulers are doing that cannot by any state of imagination be called democracy, that’s civilian rule captured in the state just like the military do.”
*’Institutional ineptitude, corruption, leadership deficits characterise Nigeria elections since 1999′
A lawyer-cum-pastor, Paul Adoiza Omoluabi, noted that the trust issue between the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the Nigerian Judiciary over the seven circles of elections since 1999 has been due to institutional ineptitude, corruption, greed, and leadership deficits.
In a reaction sent to ThisNigeria, Omoluabi stated that these challenges will persist until Nigerians are willing to make sacrifices and revamp their governance system.
He said, “Nigeria’s electoral process has been marred by uncertainties, leading to unsatisfactory results. Though a unique strength, the country’s diversity still needs to be explored. Instead, inequality, institutional ineptitude, corruption, greed, and leadership deficits have hindered our democratic progress.
“Until we are willing to sacrifice and revamp our governance system, these challenges will persist. For many Nigerians, governance and leadership are seen as opportunities for personal gain and favouritism rather than serving the greater good. Therefore, electoral processes may likely be rig to achieve this purpose.
“Weak institutions hinder a country’s growth. In Nigeria, most institutions lack the political power to implement their legal mandates, making them vulnerable to manipulation.
“To address this, I recommend a holistic reform of relevant institutions and an effective watchdog to monitor their activities. This watchdog should be empowered to punish any breaches, serving as a deterrent to others.”
