Ondo2016: Using judiciary, mischief to settle old scores

• Voice Of The West Versus A Judge’s Upending Reprimand

The politics of the 2016 Ondo State governorship election has refused to forsake a throwback to 1983. Similar to the return of President Muhammadu Buhari as Nigeria’s leader, everything seems to be on the reverse line, pointing to 1983. For instance, moving away from the violent protests that greeted the replacement of Mr. Eyitayo Jegede’s name with that of Jimoh Ibrahim on the notice board of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), as the governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the contributions of litigatnts become a pointer.

That is where memory of Ayodele Awojobi comes to life. But unlike Awojobi, who was using the instrumentality of the law to challenge social infractions, the Ondo situation has revealed some pestilential, litigious busybodies.

The litigants could not obfuscate their real intention, which revolves around distracting and destabilizing the system, for so long. When a party to the PDP serial lawsuits took on the judiciary by asking that the Court of Appeal President, Justice Zainab Bulkachuwa, ought to have obtained leave from them before setting up a substitute panel to hear Mr. Jegede’s appeal, it was obvious that a project of irritation was afoot.

And riding roughshod of judicial process, the Ali Modu Sherrif’s faction, comprising zonal officers elected on his side, rushed an application to the Supreme Court, seeking to arrest the newly constituted Court of Appeal panel from hearing appeals bothering on PDP’s nomination of candidate for the Ondo State governorship election. On top of that, the litigants are also seeking the order of the apex court, to reverse Bulkachuwa’s decision to constitute a fresh panel to hear the appeals.

To prove that the appellants were on an exercise of legal frustration, available judicial pronouncements clearly state that the participation of state executives are limited to the extent that only the national headquarters of the party should send the list of the party’s candidates to INEC. With that in mind, it becomes a puzzle why the appellant should be losing sleep over the submission of the name of Jegede instead of Jimoh.

In political parties there is what is called statutory delegates. So, granted without conceding the fact that Jimoh Ibrahim emerged as governorship candidate on his faction of the PDP, could the faction show the number of statutory delegates that took part in electing him during the primary?

There are a plethora suits involving the two factions of the PDP regarding which half holds the genuine configuration of what the INEC registered and recognised in 1998 as the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), with the umbrella as its logo.

Again, remembering that the present squabble over the umbrella is not the first, it should be clear to the protagonists what the precedent presents. When the nPDP broke away, perhaps, on account of the fact that there was a recognizable leadership with power and influence, the courts did not dance around to denounce the claim of the nPDP.

If the attempted fractionalization of the party in 2014 was ostensibly to pave way for the constitutional waiver to sanction defection to another party, then obviously there must be a grand purpose driving the present struggle for the possession of the PDP structure. Here again, the central question should be on which side of the aisle does the majority of the party caucuses predominate?

There is no doubt that the present crisis in PDP was thrown up by the excesses of the governors. But the party leaders have refused to apply good political thinking and reasoning to undo the damage brought about the imposition of some of the governors. For instance, the former PDP national publicity secretary pointed out at the onset that while the search for Adamu Mu’azu was on, the party screened and shortlisted four candidates, but added that they (NWC) decided to drag in two more names.

Sheriff

The point that would have led to early resolution of the puzzle was to identify the two names that were smuggled into the shortlist through the back door. Rather, most of the party bigwigs keep saying that impunity was PDP’s undoing. Who collected large sums of money from Sheriff to anoint him chairman when he was not in the picture during the screening?

Moving down to the present melee in Ondo, sources disclosed that when Governor Olusegun Mimiko joined the party, he bulldozed the resident members to create his own structure. It was also said that the governor played god by throwing away the sharing formular adopted after a series of reconciliation meetings to ensure that the squabble does not deny President Jonathan the expected bloc inputs of Ondo voters.

Going by the above scenario, it becomes evident that the former resident elements of PDP decided to use the forthcoming governorship election to extract their pound of flesh from Iroko, particularly his plans to leave a trusted ally as successor in the Sunshine State.

That explains the motion filed by Benson Akingboye and Ehiozuwa Agbonayiwa before the Supreme Court, seeking a stay of all proceedings before the Court of Appeal as they concern the appeals, pending the determination of the two appeals they filed on October 31, which was enrolled and assigned reference No: SC/914/2016 and SC/915/2016.

The motion also seeks a stay of all further proceedings and further hearing in suit no: CA/ABJ/402A/2016, filed on behalf of the PDP by a lawyer engaged by the Ahmed Makarfi-led faction of the party’s leadership. The plaintiffs are contending that it was wrong to allow the Court of Appeal proceed with the appeals inspite of valid appeals pending at the Supreme Court, in which the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal was being challenged.

It is in such instances that the issue of locus standi usually comes into play, because none of the two plaintiffs contested the governorship primary. But the law being an ass, those who have the facility can afford to introduce confusion.

Porous Petition, Dubious Engagement
The dust and mud preceding the November 26, Ondo governorship seems to be interminable. First, there was a petition accusing judges of taking bribes to bend the hand of justice. Then, no questions asked, the accused recoils to preserve the integrity of the bench. Could all that be a dress rehearsal to ensure that what is written at INEC remains written? Is there any attempt to get to the bottom of the petition or has it become fashionable to accuse judges without justification to constrict the free flow of justice?

However, the withdrawal of his legal representation of Jimoh Ibrahim, by Dr. Alex Izinyon, SAN, in the PDP governorship matter, is a pointer to the unserious approach of one of the parties. Izinyon, who was representing Ibrahim as respondent at the Court of Appeal, did what a good lawyer should do in such circumstances.

After being upbraided by the Justice and made to look less than his silk status, the Senior Advocate had no other way to prove that he was not privy to the porous petition that impugned the integrity and impartiality of the Judge. Certain things should not be trifled with in the name of political expediency.

Nigerians are eagerly awaiting the final outcome of the litigations to know whether the powers that be are actually behind Jimoh in his quest to trouble the peace and electoral process in Ondo State. It is equally revealing by Izinyon’s letter that the same Ibrahim that accused INEC of demanding $1m bribe has outstanding arrears of legal fees to settle the senior lawyer.

But, Justice Sankey, alongside other members of the panel hearing the PDP and governorship appeals, were forced to disqualify themselves following a petition written by Sheriff’s factional chairman in Ondo State, Biyi Poroye. Poroye, who is siding Ibrahim, alleged that Governor Mimiko had induced the justices.

Not only did the justices deny the allegations, Jimoh’s lawyer, Iziyon, also denied knowledge of the petition, stressing that he made no input neither was his advice sought before the petition was concocted. Was the Jimoh faction having the last laugh or extracting their pound of flesh through the distraction of the other camp? Could that be the agenda or a tactical pathway to bluff the system and gain the Government House, much like in the fashion of Donald Trump?

Voice of the West
But, perhaps after surveying the whole political field of intrigues in the Ondo governorship saga, Afenifere, the Pan – Yoruba socio-political Organisation, decided to call a spade a spade. The voice of Southwest declared that INEC’s decision to substitute Jegede as PDP governorship candidate was “arbitrary, wrong and unjust.”

Through its chairman, Chief Reuben Fasoranti, Afenifere concluded that the entire process seemed to be programmed to manipulate the outcome of the governorship poll, even as he warned that “the consequences might be undesirable.”

Placing responsibility for the cycle of confusion squarely on the electoral body, the Afenifere chairman said: “The INEC decision was wrong; it is arbitrary. There is no basis for it; Ibrahim went to hold his primary in Ibadan and not here. That is not fair; if he wants to be sincere and honest, the thing should be held here.
“I am bold to say that, because the process is set for manipulation. And in any case, Jegede is the choice of the people. Certainly, this is not an issue of party affiliation.”

A Judge’s Upending Rebuke
“The inability of members of the PDP to imbibe democratic tenets and act in accordance with democratic norms account for why the judiciary was being constantly invited to resolve what ordinarily ought to be internal issues of the party.” That was what could pass as an upending reprimand against PDP by Justice Ignatius Igwe Agube, who is one of the three justices on the fresh panel to hear the appeals from the PDP governorship candidate in Ondo State.

If outside enemies are stoking crisis within the party, it is obvious that PDP made itself available for the destabilization through lack of institutional discipline and respect for its constitution and regulations.

The Judge’s rebuke should move the party into serious reappraisal of its systems and operational tactics. The legal distraction should be seen as a veritable opportunity to fritter away its fiscal arsenal, as well as, weary the structure for the next round of post election petitions, especially now that the party is no longer in power at the centre.

For instance, if the election is rigged and a disputed winner is sworn into office, it is possible that those who orchaestrated the series of distractions know that the PDP may not afford the heavy cost of challenging the election through to the apex court.

What Justice Agube said could as well be a piece of advise to PDP to see that its afflictions were self inflicted. Should the judicial verdict go in its favour, the mainstream party must have lost much time for electioneering.

And being psychologically tormented, its strength in the grassroots may be badly shaken. Ondo would show how far the voters could go to separate the weak from the strong. How far could the wishes of the godfathers, both at home and abroad go to decide which party carries the day on November 26?

Jimoh Ibrahim

APC AD-iction
Can a member of a rival political party challenge the primary election of another? It seems the All Progresives Congress (APC), is frustrated by legal impendiment. Otherwise it would have been in court to challenge the process that enthroned Olusola Oke as the governorship candidate of the Alliance for Democracy (AD).

Former governorship aspirant on the APC platform, Dr. Tunji Abayomi, had stirred the hornets nest by calling for the disqualification of Oke on the grounds that he was not properly nominated for the election in line with the provisions of the Electoral Act. Abayomi, a lawyer, contended that Oke and his running mate, Gani Dauda, did not participate in the AD governorship primary.

The fight against Oke is ostensibly informed by the fear that the AD candidate would split the votes of the APC candidate in the election. Moreover, during a similar contest in 2012, Oke beat the APC candidate, Akeredolu, to the third position, in an election that the outgoing incumbent won on the platform of Labour Party (LP), for his second term in office.

So, as Abayomi engaged in fanciful arguments by insisting that INEC did not monitor the governorship primary that produced the AD flag bearers, it was evident that he merely wanted to distract the AD and its candidates for their desire and hard work to reap from the troubles entangling the two big parties.

Oke, who contested the 2012 governorship and ended up in the second position, got on the nerves of APC when he shed tears over the deplorable state of roads in Ondo east senatorial district of the state.

Although APC was not in power in the state, the party attacked the AD candidate saying that he was shedding crocodile tears to win unmerited votes. Speaking through the chairman of his media and publicity, Mr. Kolawole Olabisi, Oke had shot back, arguing that “APC has shown that Olusola Oke is their problem, because he has the overwhelming support of the people of the state as shown from the legions of members of the APC and PDP that have been flocking into our party (AD), in the last few days.”

From the exchanges, it is obvious that APC and AD have not got over their historical antagonisms that even preceded the current wrangling over the Ondo governorship. AD represents the acorn from which the APC grew. And this mutual antagonism is made worse by the outcome of the APC governorship primary, which alienated the APC national leader from the Ondo governorship, a development that makes Akeredolu still harbor the fear that it would undermine their efforts to clinch the Alagbaka House.

So, would the bickering between APC and its grandmother, AD, pave way for their distant cousin, the Social Democratic Party (SDP)? No thanks to the trouble in PDP’s paradise, all options remain feasible on the table of bookmakers. A lot depends on what new outrageous development that might pop out in the days leading to November 26.