Politics

By Sabiu Abdullahi 

The Nasarawa State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, sitting in Lafia, the state capital, has ordered the withdrawal of the Certificate of Return issued to Governor Abdullahi Sule of the All Progressives Congress (APC) following the March 18 election. 

This decision came after the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) initially declared Governor Sule the winner of the election. 

The tribunal’s ruling was a result of a petition filed by David Ubugadu of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), who contested the election against Governor Sule.

Ubugadu, dissatisfied with INEC’s declaration, approached the tribunal seeking justice. 

This ruling effectively nullified Governor Sule’s victory and led to the withdrawal of his Certificate of Return. 

By Sabiu Abdullahi 

Former APC National Chairman and ex-governor of Nasarawa State, Senator Abdullahi Adamu, staunchly defended his preference for a northern presidential candidate, stating, “I am a northerner, and I would go for a northerner; and no apologies for that. I have never hidden this.” 

When asked about his role in the party’s decision-making, Adamu emphasised the necessity of a comprehensive party process and dismissed claims of unilateral decision-making. 

He expressed his pride in his northern roots and criticised the lack of similar pride in some other regions of the country. Reflecting on his tenure as the APC National Chairman, Adamu acknowledged his significant contributions to the party’s success.

He highlighted his role in supporting President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and his admiration for Tinubu’s leadership. Despite his positive relationship with Tinubu, Adamu decided to step down from his position as APC National Chairman, citing the dynamic nature of politics and the need to adapt to changing circumstances. 

Adamu’s remarks shed light on the complexities of party politics and regional affiliations within the APC. 

As the political landscape continues to evolve, Adamu’s insights provide a glimpse into the challenges and convictions that shape the decisions of prominent political figures in Nigeria.

By Sabiu Abdullahi A former governor of Kaduna State, Alhaji Mukhtar Ramalan Yero, has resigned from the People’s Democratic Party (PDP). 

Malam Yero forwarded his resignation to the PDP today in a letter he personally signed. 

The letter read, “With grateful to Almighty Allah, I write to extend my sincere greetings and to formally inform you of my decision to leave the People’s Democratic Party (PDP). 

“In view of this, I hereby tender my resignation as a member of [the] People’s Democratic Party (PDP) with effect from 30th September 2023.” 

The former governor did not categorically state a reason for tendering his resignation.

Mansur Hassan Ph.D

The Nigerian Judiciary system, often regarded as the third arm of government, holds a pivotal position as the last resort for the common citizen seeking for justice.

However, concerns have arisen recently about its impartiality, with allegations of undue influence from the executive branch of government.

A prime illustration of this ambiguity is the recent verdict delivered by the Kaduna state Gubernatorial Elections Tribunal, which appears to contradict what transpired last week in Kano.

In the aforementioned case, the tribunal declared that it lacked the authority to invalidate votes announced by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Yet, perplexingly, a similar tribunal, convened in Kano nearly one week ago, asserted the power to cancel over 165,000 votes that had been cast in favor of HE Abba Kabir Yusuf , the duly elected governor and leader of the most populous state in Nigeria.

These inconsistent judgements have left many citizens bewildered and concerned about the integrity of the judicial system. The judiciary, often seen as a beacon of hope for justice, now faces scrutiny for potentially yielding to external pressures, particularly when it comes to cases involving the executive arm of government.

This has raised doubts about the judiciary’s ability to uphold the principles of fairness, transparency, and the rule of law, leaving individuals like yourself understandably perplexed about the state of affairs in Nigeria’s legal landscape.

Dr. Mansur Hassan Is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Mathematics, Yusuf Maitama Sule University, Kano

By Uzair Adam Imam 

The Northern Youths Assembly (Majalisar Matasan Arewa) has cautioned President Bola Tinubu against allowing his political allies to interfere with the electoral dispute in Kano State. 

The group also issued a warning of possible dire consequences if Tinubu allowed anybody to meddle in the court decision. 

The Kano State Governorship Election Tribunal recently nullified the election of Gov. Abba Yusuf of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) in favour of the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, Alhaji Yusuf Gawuna. 

However, The Daily Reality reports that Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf has since indicated his intention to go on appeal. 

In an open letter to the president on Thursday, the acting president of the group, Dr. Ali Idris, and the national publicity secretary, Comrade Adikwu Omale, said if the Nigerian democratic system should continue to operate on the basis of electoral injustice, undermining the best practices of democratic governance in fairness to all parties, the repercussions would surely be devastating. 

Part of the statement reads, “We have received with dismay, information which alleged the involvement of some elements in your Government, to have interfered and manipulated the Kano State Governorship Elections Tribunal judgment, an information which if it turns out to be true, could certainly be described as unfortunate, unprecedented, condemnable and uncalled for. 

“Kano State, as temperamental as it is, such desperate actions could trigger political crisis in the State, and could possibly lead to anarchy. 

“Kano is considered as the commercial nerve center not only for the North, but to the entire sub Saharan African countries, who have one relationship or the other with Kano State. Kano State could be described as a role model, and as the most politically strategic territory with vast knowledge and political civilization. In view of this, Kano is fragile and when broken into pieces, the national security would surely be threatened. 

“Sir, let us draw you to the memory lane, starting from 1999 to 2007, when you served as the Executive Governor of Lagos State, under AD. Your party was entirely different from the party at the centre, and despite some misunderstandings, His Excellency Olusegun Obasanjo led Federal Government did not make any attempt to snatch the mandate which the good people of Lagos State gave you, to manage the affairs of the State, from 1999 to 2007. 

“Therefore allowing, some alleged members of your Government, to mastermind the conspiracy of snatching the mandate of the Kano people, is as good as inviting hatred against your own personality, doubting your commitment to upholding democratic principles, institutionalizing electoral injustice, dashing the hope of the Nigerian electorates to lose complete confidence in the system, and subscribing to the school of thought which emphasizes on the unsuitability of the democratic system for African countries. 

“In addition, if this electoral injustice is allowed to thrive, it would further reaffirm the failure of your Government to uphold the rule of law, and treat all citizens equally and fairly regardless of ethnicity, region, religion, party affiliation and others, and the perceived situation wouldn’t only amount to creating unrest, but would surely be a set back on the Nigerian democratisation and Africa as a whole. 

“The perceived conspiracy by some alleged elements in the Government, deploying Government machineries and influence, to destroy Kano State, the consequences would not end and stop in Kano, as the repercussions would certainly create a multiplier negative effects on other states of the federation.  

“Therefore using politics to ignite crisis in Kano, through the Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, would surely metamorphose into creating crisis which would be difficult to control, based on the brewing tensions, resulting from the Kano State Governorship Elections Tribunal Judgment.  

“Therefore, there is no better time for you to act, than now to save the situation, by prevailing on your party members who have been alleged to be involved in this political recklessness, as the risk is not worth trying,” the statement added.

By  Rabiu Gama

I had the (dis)pleasure of reading the full judgement of the Kano State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal last night, which was delivered on Wednesday, October 20, 2023, via Zoom. Here are my humble thoughts on it.

By the way, I am writing this under the safe assumption that anyone who is reading this is quite familiar with the story behind the judgment. Nonetheless, clarity is important. So, for the sake of clarity, let me quickly state that APC is the Petitioner in this case, while INEC, Abba Kabir Yusuf (AKY) and NNPP are the First, Second and Third Respondents, respectively. Nasiru Yusuf Gawuna, APC’s candidate, was not a party in the suit. The Tribunal, relying on the provision of Section 133 (1) of the Electoral Act, 2022, and some judicial authorities, held, correctly in my opinion, that Gawuna must not be a party before the Tribunal.

As I see it, NNPP’s and AKY’s lawyers did a bad job. INEC’s lawyers did worse, though: INEC’s legal team failed miserably to prove that the election was conducted in compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022 (the burden or onus of proof was on them in that regard) as alleged by the Petitioner (the APC). The First Respondent, i.e., INEC, made a terrible and costly mistake of relying lazily on the weaknesses of the Petitioner’s case. The cost of not doing the right thing at the right time is always high!

Since the outcome of an appeal largely, if not completely so, hinges on the proceedings of the lower court (the Tribunal in this case), then it is my humble opinion that NNPP’s (AKY’s) chances of winning at the Court of Appeal might not be as promising as many hope it to be. It shocked me that NNPP’s lawyers could not even establish that AKY was a legitimate member of the party when he contested the 18^th of March Governorship Election. The Tribunal was benevolent enough to point out some ways that they could have followed to establish it, but they couldn’t.

I, however, failed to grasp or discern why the Tribunal refused to apply “the principle of margin of lead” when it went ahead to declare that APC’s candidate, Nasiru Gawuna, was the winner of the election even though it had already found and, in no uncertain terms, admitted that the number of cancellations was in hundreds of thousands while its final finding showed Nasiru Gawuna was leading with tens of thousands only. The Tribunal, in my humble opinion, should have ordered a re-run: based on that finding, the election was supposed to be declared “inconclusive”.

The Tribunal also seems to have disregarded the provision of Section 63(2) of the Electoral Act, 2022 when it invalidated over 165,000 votes that were cast in favour of NNPP/AKY for the reason that the ballot papers were neither signed nor stamped, in other words, the ballot papers did not carry the official mark that was prescribed by the commission (INEC). The said provision of the Electoral Act is to the effect that even if a ballot paper is not signed or stamped, the Presiding Officer of the concerned Polling Unit can go ahead and count the ballot paper as valid.

All in all, I find some of the reasonings and conclusions of the Tribunal, based on what was laid before it, legally sound. But the Tribunal’s failure to apply “the principle of margin of lead”, as well as its apparent disregard for the provision of Section 63(2) of the Electoral Act, 2022, do not sit well with me.

Even though it is trite that nobody knows for sure what a court of law will do, I will still strongly advise that AKY’s supporters (of which I am not ashamed to admit I am one) should manage their hopes regarding the chances of success in the Court of Appeal. This is because the odds seem frighteningly balanced. The scale might tilt in favour of any side.

The right thing to do right now is to pray for a “legal miracle” – whatever that means. Some miracle might happen, hopefully in the Court of Appeal, as the Supreme Court rarely tempers with the concurrent findings of the lower courts (the Tribunal and the Court of Appeal) unless those findings are glaringly perverse or have occasioned a miscarriage of justice.

Rabiu Gama is Law student. He writes from the Faculty of Law at Bayero University, Kano. He can be reached on 09061912994 or at rabiuinuwagama@gmail.com.

By Rukayya Abubakar Othman

In the last few years, Kano State has been plagued by a seemingly endless and unabated fierce political war that has divided the state and truncated its progress. The two principal political empires, the Kwankwasiyya and the Gandujiyya have polarised the people of Kano along two opposing camps, each calling for the head of the other.

It is difficult for any state or country to develop under an unstable and tumultuous political climate. Kano’s experience over the past years is a case in point. The incessant strife between the Kwankwasiyya adherents and the Ganduje’s followers has created a hostile environment for economic growth and social progress.

The recent election tribunal court verdict in Kano has further opened another dimension to the whole gamut of issues. The Kwankwasiyya adherents are questioning the true meaning and concept of independence of the Judiciary.

Will those who massively voted for NNPP accept the verdict of our courts in good faith? Will it further deepen confrontational politics in Kano? The answers to these questions can only be found in the upcoming Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court judgments.

More tellingly, the recent trend will no doubt tragically change the course of Kano politics. If the governorship polls in Kano are taken out of the general election, it will become like Imo, Edo, and Ondo states, where the governorship elections are held on different dates from the general election. This will have a multiplier effect on the political landscape of Kano, considering the central role that the state plays in the region.

The political leaders in Kano must put the state’s interests first and work together to resolve their differences. The people of Kano have suffered enough from the political instability in the state. It is time for politicians to put their differences aside and work for the good of the people.

Lastly, the recent court verdict in Kano has opened up a new dimension to the already turbulent political landscape of the state. It is difficult to predict the long-term impact of the ruling, but it will significantly impact the future of Kano politics.

The political leaders in Kano must put the state’s interests first and work together to resolve their differences. The people of Kano have suffered enough from the political instability in the state. It is time for politicians to put their differences aside and work for the good of the people.

Rukayya Abubakar Othman wrote via othmanrukayya0@gmail.com.

By Muhammad Shamsuddeen

On the first ground, which alleges that Engr. Abba Kabir Yusuf was not qualified to contest the election because his name was not submitted by the party 30 days before the primary election. The tribunal accepted the respondent’s contention in their preliminary objection to the effect that this ground is an internal affair of the party and mainly a pre-election matter in respect of which the tribunal has no jurisdiction.

The court then proceeded to hold that even if the evidence before the court proves the failure to submit the name as alleged by the petitioners, the court had no power to make pronouncement in that respect. Consequently, the ground was struck out for want of jurisdiction.

The second ground is that the election was invalid by reason of non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act 2022 in over 300 polling units. To prove this case, the petitioners called only 31 witnesses, 30 among whom are Polling Unit agents of only 30 of the affected Polling Units. The law, as held in a plethora of authorities, is that to prove noncompliance in several Polling Units, the petitioner is under a duty to call witnesses from each of the Polling Units who saw the noncompliance first-hand.

Despite the reiteration of the above provisions in Obi v INEC and Atiku v INEC, the Kano tribunal shut its eyes against the doctrine of judicial precedent and held that it would rely on the documents dumped on the court, investigate the same at its Chambers and made findings in respect thereto.

The court, on its own, analysed the documents and held that all the Polling Units in respect of which the petitioner complained must be cancelled, and the number of PVCs collected in the Polling Units is 231,843. The tribunal, instead of making a pronouncement of inconclusive, considering that the margin between the candidates is less than 231,843, just kept quiet on that.

It should be noted that the tribunal did not advert its mind to the foundational position of the law of ‘he who asserts must prove’ and went ahead to believe that whatever was presented before it by APC was true and need not be validated by credible witnesses. The greatest error is from the tribunal’s determination of ground 3 of the petition, which alleges that the 2nd respondent was not elected by valid lawful votes at the election.

The petitioner’s contention here was that there were several ballot papers that were not stamped, signed or dated, for which reason they alleged that the votes were invalid. As a preliminary point, it should be noted that the petitioners did not plead the number of ballots affected by the alleged non-compliance. The law is that parties are bound by their pleadings.

Section 63 of the Electoral Act provides that; “(1) Subject to subsection (2), a ballot paper which does not bear official mark prescribed by the Commission shall not be counted. (2) If the returning officer is satisfied that a ballot paper which does not bear the official mark was from a book of ballot papers which was furnished to the presiding officer of the polling unit in which the vote was cast for use at the election in question, he or she shall, notwithstanding the absence of the official mark, count that ballot paper.”

The petitioners called only one Dr Harbau, who alleged that he is an expert and that he analysed the ballot papers and discovered that they were unsigned, undated, unstamped or affected by a combination of two or more of these. However, the written statement on oath of this witness was filed long after the hearing had commenced, and not along with the petition as mandated by the Electoral Act and the case of Obi v Inec decided 2 weeks ago.

Instead of discountenancing the oath of the witness, the court believed him line, hook and sinker. There is no evidence from the Petitioner that any of the ballot papers were rejected by the respective presiding officers or the collation officers. There is, therefore, the presumption that they were believed by the officials as having emanated from INEC.

Similarly, in Boni v Muazu (2004) 16 NWLR PT. 900, the Court of Appeal held that to prove ballot votes stuffing, it is the duty of the petitioners not only to produce the ballot papers allegedly stuffed, they must also produce the particular ballot boxes in which the ballots were stuffed, and same must be demonstrated before the court by bringing out the ballot papers from the boxes and counting them before the court to establish the claim. This did not happen.

The court still went ahead to unilaterally cancel the votes, namely 165,763 belonging to the 2nd respondent. With this cancellation, the margin between the parties is 36,766, with Gawuna leading. However, since the court earlier held that the number of collected PVCs in the cancelled polling units is 231,843, the only conclusion is to declare the election inconclusive. The court shut its eyes to this legal position and declared Gawuna, who is not a party in the proceedings, a winner of the election.

In the determination of grounds 2 and 3 of the petition, the tribunal refused to follow the precedent in Obi v INEC, Atiku v INEC, AYETOLA V INEC, BONI V MUAZU and several other decisions decided by the superior court. This decision is indeed one of a kind!

Muhammad Shamsuddeen is a legal practitioner based in Kano.

By Muhammadu Sabiu 

Kano State Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf, a member of the New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP), has responded to the recent State Tribunal judgement that quashed his election victory with unwavering determination and optimism, describing the ruling as a “temporary setback.” 

In his statement following the judgement, Governor Yusuf expressed his commitment to continuing the positive work initiated for the people of Kano State, declaring, “It will not dampen my morale, as we will continue to do good works we have started for the good people of Kano State.” 

Governor Yusuf and his supporters firmly believe that the tribunal’s decision was marred by errors and misapplications of the law. He expressed confidence that the ruling would not stand in subsequent appeals, including those at the Supreme Court. 

He defended the integrity of his election, stating, “My election was testified to be upright and just; the people of Kano came out en masse to cast their votes for me, so nobody will sit down and upturn my victory.” 

In a plea to his supporters and the entire population of Kano, the governor urged them to remain law-abiding and patient throughout this legal process. 

He reassured them that the recent judgement did not signify an immediate exit from office, emphasising, “The judgement does not in any way mean that we are just going out of government; we are still in power.

Even tomorrow, we are going to hold the weekly Executive Council Meeting to come out with laudable projects.” 

Concluding his statement, Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf firmly asserted, “The judgement will not dampen our morale because it is a temporary setback. We will get justice at the Apex Court.” 

As the legal battle unfolds, Kano State remains in anticipation of further developments, with Governor Yusuf and his party gearing up to pursue justice through the higher courts.

By Muhammadu Sabiu 

The Bauchi State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal has upheld Governor Bala Mohammed’s victory in the hotly contested March 18th election. 

The tribunal, chaired by Justice P.T. Kwahar, dismissed the petition by the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its candidate, former Chief of Air Staff, Air Marshal Sadique Abubakar, citing no substantial grounds for nullification. 

Justice Kwahar emphasised the importance of upholding the rule of law and democratic processes.

Governor Bala Mohammed expressed gratitude to the people and called for unity, while APC representatives acknowledged the rule of law and hinted at exploring other legal options. 

This verdict solidifies Governor Bala Mohammed’s mandate and keeps Bauchi State under his leadership.