Urhobo News

*By Professionals For Good Governance and Social Justice (PGGSJ)*

The destiny of a people is about to slip; hence, it is time for good men and women with virtue to rise in defense of our collective existence. Where evil thrives for too long, it is expected that something must be done to give hope and turn a new chapter. We have thought with pains for too long, how to reach out and appeal to the conscience of the entire judiciary in Nigeria to save the soul of the country from imminent and collateral damage in case they do not know or have refused to know or taken our current situation for granted.

The judiciary is one of the arms of government in any democracy that stands distinctly out. They exist to stabilize the polity, protect the down-trodden, give meaning to the rich, reassure hope and separate every fight among individuals, groups, institutions as well as governments. All these powers rest with the Supreme Court and that is why they are called SUPREME. Anyone can reject any ruling/judgment from other lower Courts in Nigeria, hence, the opportunity for appeal, but once the judgment/pronouncement/ ruling comes from the Supreme Court, it is expected to be obeyed by both government and others in the country.

Therefore, the judiciary is represented in this write-up by the Supreme Court as the most powerful arm of government. In any society where the executive and the legislature are more powerful than the judiciary, something must be wrong. Either the democracy being practiced is fake or corruption is pervasive in the system or that the judiciary does not know her powers or that they are afraid to exercise such powers, or they have joined the corrupt government to serve the nation soured judgments. Whichever is the case, as identified above, it will not be a good sign to engender development. For a country to develop, there must be discipline on the part of individuals, groups, institutions, and governments. Such discipline is driven by adherence to the rule of law. Such laws are provided by the Constitution of Nigeria, Acts of the parliaments, administrative laws, rules and regulations as well as convention.

It is the duty of the Courts to interpret these laws on their merits and to ensure that such laws are obeyed and enforced. When the Courts allow an individual, group, institution, or government to breach any of these laws and get applauded, know that the nation is drifting to the sideline and will not take too long for anarchy to surface.

It will be our greatest interest if everyone’s attention is draw to the February 25th, 2023, presidential election in Nigeria, as well as the activities before, during and after the election. We saw the impunity displayed by the political class, the collaboration with security agents and thugs to unleash mayhem on the citizens of Nigeria. We all saw the hijack of ballot boxes and destruction of election materials; we saw the killings and injuries sustained by Nigerian electorates at various pooling units. We equally saw the ethnic profiling and deprivation of many Nigerians from voting. We were not unaware of the abandonment of the use of Bimodal Vote Accreditation System (BVAS) and multiple thumb-printing that existed in some pooling units during the election. We witnessed the counting of results and the inability of the BVAS to upload the results to the IREV at various pooling units. We also witnessed when electoral officers told the presiding officers to bring the pooling units results to the collation centres at ward levels to upload. Nigeria saw the forceful hijack of some results and electoral materials at pooling units thereby depriving Party Agents the opportunity to have copies of the result sheets and other electorates from snapping them with their phones. Further, Nigerians witnessed the alteration of those results by parties that benefited from them before security agents, some party agents, and some observers. We saw that some results were uploaded to the IREV while others took a very long time to upload, and the rest could not be uploaded till date. We witnessed that many results uploaded to the IREV did not tally with what we snapped from Form EC8As at the pooling units and other results were blurred or empty and some having images not connected to the election. THERE IS NONE THAT NIGERIANS DID NOT SEE.

With the help of social media, we shared all that we saw to our platforms and the whole world got the evidence. Hence, it was easy for all the observers both local and international to align with the position that “the 2023 presidential election falls short of what any reasonable democracy can offer”.

When we witnessed our results being changed, we had two options available to us. First, was to resort to violence and destroy everyone involved in the malicious act, including the security agents, since we know and believe that no Army of a nation can be greater or more powerful than the collective resolve of the people. We knew and we were not afraid to act, but we put the nation first and took the second option as the best option. This second option was to take our matter to the judiciary that has all the powers to resolve the injustice. All Nigerian electorates would have taken the information we have to the Court but since the rules stipulate filing by lawyers, we allowed them to do their job.

When it comes to election matters, we ought to note the following:

1. It is the responsibility of everyone to prove irregularities and not abandoning it for the Petitioners alone to prove. All of us witnessed the irregularities and atrocities committed during the election including the Justices of all Courts. We should all strive to prove them so that we don’t allow a criminal to preside over our affairs. Hence, the saying that “the onus lies on the person who alleges to prove should have limited application in electoral matters. The Court should attempt to unravel the truth where it exists and NOT wait for a Petitioner to supply all the evidence and equally convince them beyond every reasonable doubt.
2. The issue of technicality should play a limited role in deciding electoral cases because we are looking at the mandate of the people and not how professional the lawyers are in presentation. The electorates that voted are requesting for their stolen mandate to be returned. The Justices presiding the cases should have this in mind and focus on returning that mandate and not whether any lawyer complied with certain rules in evidence Act or not.
3. The Court should be alert to their responsibilities by asking the electoral body INEC that conducted the election to bring all materials used in collating results, counting and declaration of the winner. There must be sufficient time for INEC to prove this before the Court. Instead of having this as the objective of the Tribunal, they sat back and expect the Petitioners to get the materials from INEC and even when INEC refused to furnish them, the Tribunal did nothing and proceeded with judgment, when the facts are still being hidden. Nigerians known that also.
4. Why we took the second option of presenting our matter to Court instead of resorting to violence was because of BVAS. Nigerians knew that with BVAS, all stolen votes will be recovered by the Court if they wish to. With BVAS, you determine over-voting, and the law says cancel. All polling units that voted without BVAS accreditation, the law says cancel. With BVAS, results are to be snapped and uploaded to IREV, where this did not happen, the Law says investigate and punish anyone culpable. What we saw was the neglect of the BVAS by the Tribunal, where truth is found and proceeding with technical judgment. It was a collective shame that INEC being an institution of government gave certified blurred results, empty papers, and other images to a Petitioner as results gotten from IREV and the Judges accepted them without demanding for the real results from Forms EC8As kept by INEC. This was the highest insult from INEC to the Court (1st), Nigerians (2nd) and Petitioner (3rd). The Tribunal swallowed the insult and proceeded with judgment.
5. Every law made has a reason for making it. The Court should focus on the reasons for the Laws and give interpretation to serve the purposes.
6. If the Law forbids someone with dual citizenship from being the President of Nigeria, what is the intention of such Law? The intention is to prevent someone from being loyal to a country where he places allegiance and transferring national secret to that country or betray one Country in favour of the other. If a Russian citizen becomes American president, he can transfer American Nuclear codes to Russian or other classified information. Therefore, it is the duty of everyone to investigate and find out if the candidate of the Party declared winner in the February 25th Presidential election has dual citizenship or not. A passport was presented, the only defense we saw was that it has expired. The Petitioner asked if passport expiration amounts to expiration of citizenship. No answer was given, but the Tribunal held that the evidence was not properly presented as if it is to the advantage of the Petitioner alone if a citizen of another country ruling Nigeria is unraveled.
7. We saw when the issue of double or invalid nomination of the APC candidate was raised. This is clearly stated in the Electoral Act, but the Tribunal held that only the 1999 Constitution as Amended is before them but threw away the Electoral Act and INEC guidelines. Are we expected to make progress with this kind of judgment?
8. The issue of electoral fraud was raised by the Petitioner. Reports were presented that Pooling units results in form EC8As were changed at collation centres. To perfect this, INEC intentionally switched off the IREV server to buy time in carrying out the crime; but claimed that there was a glitch. An expert who is a staff of Amazon Web Services (AWS) that hosted the server testified before the Court that there was no glitch on the AWS Server / Network. Rather than focus on how to find the true position, the Tribunal dismissed the evidence simply because the witness is a member of Labour Party. How does the witness Party membership affect her testimony? What other means did the Court use to know the truth? It is on record that TINUBU’s lone witness is an APC member and serving Senator, but his witness was not dismissed on Party membership. Is this the rule of law that we all yearn for?
9. It is equally disheartening that the Tribunal admitted that APC candidate forfeited the sum of $460,000 as proceed of Narcotic dealings in the USA but held that the Money committed the crime. Is this not laughable and a disgrace to the entire judiciary in Nigeria?
10. The issue of 25% in FCT has generated much debate, even by senior lawyers. This debate ensued because someone has been declared winner by INEC already, therefore whoever will benefit from such declaration will interpret in favour of the status quo. Their position has been that FCT residents’ votes cannot be superior to that of other states. The spirit of the constitution cannot be to make FCT special and that what if someone wins in 36 states and loses FCT below 25%, does it mean that FCT can deny the person President? Our only concern is to point something out there. The constitution did not make FCT superior to other states in voting. The constitution says a candidates shall be declared President after scoring highest number of votes cast and getting at least 25% of votes in 2/3 of the states and FCT. What this means is that 25% should be in 24 states plus 1 (FCT). Hence, in getting 25% is 25 states, let FCT be one of them. If FCT’s 25% has made it superior to other states, the superiority still exists in other 24 states. The difference is that those states were not specified. the idea is to ensure spread of voters to support a candidate who must be a President in terms of capturing different regions, ethnic groups, languages, among others. Hence, Abuja as the Federal Capital Territory, housing the president and all ministers from different states, National assembly members from different regions, ethnic group, languages, among others, headquarters of all Ministries where Civil/Public servants from all regions, ethnic groups, religions, languages among others work, has provided a veritable platform that the constitution is looking at, by expecting the candidate who has scored the highest number of votes to get 25% in 24 states. What the constitution is looking for is already found in Abuja. That is why over the years, the indigenous communities in FCT have been relocated to suburbs, paving way for Nigerians from other regions, ethnic groups, religions, languages among others to inhabit. This was how the consideration of FCT was done. The interpretation should not be made based on sentiment. If this is not okay with the present Nigerians, the Constitution should be amended to read 25% in 25 states where FCT is regarded as a state. If this is done, the indigenes of FCT can demand to reclaim their lands donated with understanding to Nigerians from other regions, ethnic groups, religions, languages etc. for the purpose of administering the country.
11. It is highly disappointing for people to witness crime, including the Judges and the Tribunal come up with the judgment that there was no crime. Next time, people will not take such matter to Court, and many will die in the field when they insist on resolving the issues on the spot. The blood of those who died or that will die because of poor judgment from Courts will be on the head of the Judges concerned.
12. We have heard several arguments that Nigerians are discussing about the Court (judiciary) on social media thereby insulting the Judges. If the executive and the legislature can be discussed by Nigerians even on social media, why should the judiciary not be discussed? Should bad judgment be as a result of discussion on social media or truth that is presented and sought for by the Court?

This open letter is addressed to the Supreme Court to save this country by taking steps to discover the truth and return our stolen mandate.

2. INEC cannot hide our over 2.5million votes from 18,088 pooling units and the Court gives judgment without first mandating INEC to bring those results. If 2.5million vote are removed from any candidate’s score and added to any of the three leading candidates, it changes who won the election and Nigerian are waiting to get their results.
3. The Supreme Court should not hide under any Law to tell Nigerians that time has elapsed to present new evidence. All the results gotten from the election and canvassed by the Petitioners should be demanded by the Supreme Court. The results should be re-collected, recounted and the winner declared. Remember, the Supreme Court can make Laws and equally invalidate any law made based on the doctrine of necessity. Using elapse of time to deny Nigerians their rightful leader who won election tantamount to allowing a candidate who stole the mandate to rule that country rather than be in prison.
4. The issue of giving judgment based on National Interest should be done with clearly stated objectives. Is the insecurity that bad leadership in Nigeria has caused, the National Interest? Is the poverty in the land, killings, agitations and growing divisions in the country, the National interest? Is election rigging, mandate stealing and destruction of moral principles of the nation the National Interest? Are the occasional killings of our military and other security agents by criminal elements in the country based on poor leadership the National Interest? Is the present cost of living the National Interest? The National Interest upon which the judgment should be based is the collective will of Nigerians to usher a new Nigeria, where there will be discipline, Rule of Law, peaceful coexistence, prosperity for all and consideration of every section of the country in leadership.

No One Can Develop a Country With Stolen Mandate

1. The Supreme Court should not send Nigerians into the conduct of another election (rerun) when our votes are hidden in INEC headquarters.
2. The present INEC leadership should be not allowed to conduct another election in Nigeria having supervised the worst election ever held in the country.
3. Validation the PEPT judgment will amount to reversing all the gains made in electoral reforms in Nigeria. Electoral Act was passed in 2018 that guaranteed electronic accreditation/transmission of results, President Buhari refused to sign. INEC kept server for upload of results in 2019 election which was done by presiding officers. INEC denied the existence of the server and the Court held that it was not part of the then Electoral Law. From that 2019 to 2022, several efforts were made to Pass new Electoral Act and assented by the President. In February 2022, such long efforts were achieved, hence, The 2022 Electoral Act. Every effort in getting the Electoral Act and INEC published guidelines is to ensure transparency of voting, counting and declaration of results/winners. If Supreme Court agrees with Tribunal on this because of one person, all effort of over 220 million Nigerians in getting our elections right will be proved abortive. Next time, INEC will abandon BVAS accreditation and do manual marking of register where ballot boxes and papers will be hijacked, & multiple thumb-printing will be recorded. The blood of people that will die in fighting for election will be on the Judges’ heads.
4. Nigerians have downloaded the results from IREV and saw the mess by INEC which we expect the Court to correct. The Petitioners have presented evidence through their witnesses, a professor of mathematics proving that Labour Party won in Rivers, Benue, among others from the IREV copy uploaded by INEC hence, the Court ought to have intensified effort to ascertain the remaining fraud, to retrieve Nigerians’ mandate. Rather, they discarded the witness on the basis of not including him in the Petitioner brief.
5. The Supreme Court is the highest Court of the land with great powers. A pronouncement to sack a government with stolen mandate will take effect immediately. Nigerians beg on you to conquer every obstacle to this mission. No one will threaten you more than your conscience. The fact that many believed that the judiciary in Nigeria has been pocketed by the executive can be corrected now. Are you not tired of the situation in Nigeria? It is either the Supreme Court or Revolution that can save us. The price of the latter is too high; hence we resort to appealing to your conscience to help us achieve a new Nigeria where our collective greatness will be achieved.

Peter Obi won the presidential election of February 25th, 2023 and INEC is hiding the results in their headquarters. We have seen the ones from IREV where Peter Obi won in many areas, but INEC declared other things. Help us to get them so that Nigerians will not be tempted to go to INEC Headquarters physically to get the results. The price of the latter will be too high, and the Supreme Court will not like us to do so.

We have put several efforts to achieve a new Nigeria. First, we ensured the passage of the 2022 Electoral Act. Second, we turned out en masse to register to vote. Third, we queued to collect our voters’ cards (PVCs), notwithstanding the obstacles. Fourth, we campaigned for our candidate in a Political Party different from APC and PDP without anyone elected on that platform. Fifth, we deployed our resources devoid of stolen money from government to ensure widespread campaign. Sixth, we did millions of matches across the length and breadth of Nigeria to sail our candidate. Seventh, we protected our candidate with our lives, when we were not sure what the security agents would do since they serve the government that we want to retire. Eight, we voted en-mass during the election in a manner that has never been done before in Nigeria. Ninth, we ensured that we gathered evidence of the election electronically as much as possible.

However, INEC switched off the IREV server and stole our mandate. In a bid to pursue them, they made several mistakes in collating and tabulating the results. That is why we want the SUPREME COURT to revisit the matter and get our results out. It is an insult to the Judges for INEC to look them on their faces and gave Blurred results to Labour Party to submit to them. Judges saw the unreadable blurred results and applauded INEC for doing so. Does this Act not make the Tribunal an accomplice to the Electoral Fraud of February 25th, 2023? INEC destroyed our dream of getting a new Nigeria where things work for everybody. The Tribunal has energized INECs effort to steal our mandate. We appeal to the Supreme Court to help us retrieve the mandate.

This Is the Right Thing to Do. This Is What Our Founding Fathers Want Us to Do. This Is How to Build a Great Society. The World Will Hail You for Your Bravery.

Signed:

Dr Ben Chukwu, Convener.

Mr I. Emmanuel, Secretary.

‘It is undemocratic’—SERAP sues 36 governors over failure to account for N72bn subsidy palliative

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has filed a lawsuit against the 36 state governors in the country over “their failure to account for the spending of the N72 billion palliative collected from the Federal Government, including details of the beneficiaries and the reliefs provided with the money.”

The Federal Government recently disbursed N2 billion out of the N5 billion palliative package to each state of the federation and the federal capital territory (FCT), to address the impact of the removal of fuel subsidy.

In the suit number FHC/L/CS/1943/2023 filed last Friday at the Federal High Court in Lagos, SERAP is seeking: “an order of mandamus to direct and compel each of the 36 state governors to account for the spending of the N2 billion palliative collected by the governors from the Federal Government.”

SERAP is seeking: “an order of mandamus to direct and compel each of the 36 state governors to disclose details of the beneficiaries and the reliefs provided to the poorest and most vulnerable Nigerians with the money.”

SERAP is also seeking: “an order of mandamus to direct and compel each of the 36 state governors to instruct the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to monitor the spending of fuel subsidy palliative collected by them.”

In the suit, SERAP is arguing that: “Government secrecy is fundamentally anti-democratic. Secrecy in the spending of the N72 billion collected by the 36 state governors would create distrust or suspicion of the government. The failure by the governors to account for the public funds is both legally and morally wrong.”

SERAP is also arguing that, “The 36 state governors are constitutionally required to act in the public interest. Secrecy in government is a form of coercion. Government secrecy promotes arbitrariness and covers illegal acts.”

According to SERAP, “The right of access to official information such as the spending of the N72 billion by the governors exists to facilitate the exercise of free expression right, discover the truth, and encourage citizens’ participation in a democracy.”

SERAP is also arguing that, “The right to access information held by public officials and bodies is also essential for collective decision-making in a democratic society. The right to know strengthens the enjoyment of other constitutionally guaranteed human rights and expands the whole system of freedom of expression.”

The suit filed on behalf of SERAP by its lawyers, Kolawole Oluwadare and Mrs Blessing Ogwuche, read in part: “It is in the public interest to direct and compel the 36 state governors to account for the spending of the N72 billion palliative and any subsequent disbursement of public funds to the states.”

“There is no democratic freedom without accountability and the basic postulate of accountability is that the people should have information about the functioning of the government.”

“Compelling and directing the governors to account for the spending of the N72 billion would increase government transparency and enhance an open and democratic society.”

“A functioning democracy rests upon participation and accountability. Citizens cannot fully participate in a democracy unless they are allowed to effectively enjoy the right to know what their government is doing in their name.”

“The right of access to information also lets in light and allows the public to scrutinise the workings of the government and find truth in them. Nigerians have the right to know how their states are spending the fuel subsidy relief funds. It is part of their legally enforceable human rights.”

“Transparency and accountability in the spending of the N72 billion and any subsequent disbursement to the governors would help to reduce the risk of corruption, mismanagement, diversion, or opportunism.”

“The oversight afforded by public access to the details of the spending of the N72 billion palliative and any subsequent disbursement to the governors would serve as an important check on the activities of the states, and help to prevent abuses of the public trust.”

“The constitutional principle of democracy provides a foundation for Nigerians’ right to know details about the spending of the N72 billion fuel subsidy palliative. Citizens’ right to know is crucial for the country’s democratic order.”

“The effective operation of representative democracy depends on the people being able to scrutinise, discuss and contribute to government decision making, including on the fuel subsidy relief funds.”

“The removal of subsidy on petrol continues to negatively and disproportionately affect the poor and socially and economically vulnerable Nigerians in several states, undermining their right to adequate standard of living.”

“The Freedom of Information Act, Section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended], article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantee to everyone the right to information, including about how the N72 billion fuel subsidy relief funds are spent.”

“By the combined reading of the provisions of the Nigerian Constitution, the Freedom of Information Act, and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, applicable throughout Nigeria, there are transparency obligations imposed on the 36 states to account for the spending of the N72 billion fuel subsidy palliative.”

“The Nigerian Constitution, Freedom of Information Act, and the country’s anti-corruption and human rights obligations rest on the principle that citizens should have access to information regarding their government’s activities.”

“States cannot hide under the excuse that the Freedom of Information Act is not applicable to them to refuse to provide the details being sought, as all the 36 states also have clear legal obligations to provide the information as prescribed by the provisions of the Nigerian Constitution, and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and. Enforcement) Act.”

No date has been fixed for the hearing of the suit.

Kolawole Oluwadare

SERAP Deputy Director

1/10/2023

Lagos, Nigeria

Emails: info@serap-nigeria.org; news@serap-nigeria.org

Twitter: @SERAPNigeria

Website: www.serap-nigeria.org

For more information or to request an interview, please contact us on: +2348160537202