The ongoing legal challenges to the outcome of the 2023 General Election in the country have raised concerns regarding the legitimacy of the winners as they are sworn into office, leaving many to ponder whether a review of the constitution and electoral law is not necessary to fix this.
This issue has sparked widespread criticism and raised significant concerns about the legitimacy of the May 29 inauguration for the swearing-in of state governors, their deputies, as well as the President and Vice President, while cases remain unresolved in the courts. The winners of the legislative elections are also caught up in the web.
While the concerns have a basis for legitimacy, the fact remains that there is a constitutional lacuna for handling a case where the tenure of one President or governor runs out and another cannot take charge on the basis of unresolved electoral disputes. This is where Nigeria’s political state finds itself and it is a crisis that could have been avoided ab initio.
To prevent such a situation in the future, it is crucial that all legal challenges of the process and results of elections are wrapped up before inauguration. This argument is supported by recent events, including civil society protests, multiple petitions before election petition tribunals and security measures surrounding the election disputes. I believe that by prioritising a constitutional review, Nigeria can uphold the unequivocal status of the duly elected leader and maintain the stability of its democratic system.
The most poignant basis that underlines the need for ensuring the legitimacy of an elected official by inauguration is to ensure that Nigeria avoids scenes of such protests as have been witnessed recently. The most significant of these took place when a coalition of civil society groups staged a protest at the Appeal Court in Abuja, urging the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal to halt the inauguration of the President-Elect, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, basing their demand on the need to resolve the court cases challenging his victory before he is sworn-in.
The protesters highlighted the potential implications of unresolved legal challenges on the legitimacy of the President-Elect. Their protests were a clear indication that there are doubts among sections of the public regarding the electoral process.
Additionally, the commencement of the pre-hearing sessions at the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal sheds light on the gravity of the legal challenges to the presidential election results. Petitions filed by Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP), the two main opposition candidates, seek to nullify Tinubu’s victory. These petitions are not isolated incidents but represent a broader sentiment of dissatisfaction with the election outcome.
The existence of multiple petitions from various political parties underscores the significance of conducting a comprehensive review to address all legal challenges and ensure a fair and conclusive resolution. By resolving these disputes promptly and transparently before May 29, Nigeria can bolster public trust in the electoral process and strengthen the democratic institutions.
Dr Adah Obekpa, a Nigerian medical practitioner residing in the United States, recently filed a suit to delay the scheduled presidential inauguration on May 29. His lawsuit adds complexity to Nigeria’s political landscape and introduces the possibility of disrupting the democratic process should the justices agree to grant his prayers.
Obekpa’s appeal is based on allegations of being unlawfully excluded from the 2011 general election, claiming that he was unjustly stopped from participating as the potential presidential candidate of the African Renaissance Party (ARP) and highlighting the precedence set by the Amaechi vs Omehia case.
By resolving long-standing legal disputes and ensuring the timely conclusion of such cases before inauguration day, Nigeria can demonstrate its commitment to upholding the rule of law and the principles of democracy.
Aside from the legal challenge instituted by the opponents of the President-elect at the tribunal, a request made to the Federal High Court in Abuja seeking to halt the inauguration of the President-Elect further deepens the debate regarding the interpretation of constitutional provisions. The request was made by five Nigerians to the Federal High Court in Abuja. The petition argues that Bola Tinubu’s declaration as the president-elect was unconstitutional due to his alleged failure to win at least 25 per cent of the votes cast in Abuja, the country’s capital.
The interpretation of this constitutional provision has been subject to debate, underscoring the need for a comprehensive review of the constitution to clarify and resolve such contentious issues, even if the resolution of some of the present legal challenges will offer further clarity of this requirement.
Nigeria’s history of prolonged military rule and electoral violence necessitates a clear and unambiguous resolution to prevent any further constitutional crisis. A constitutional review will enable the country to update its laws and ensure that they align with the evolving needs and aspirations of its citizens.
It is not doing the legitimacy of the next administration a world of good that it carries this baggage of suspicious victory to power, given every other challenge with which it will be tasked from day one. This underscores the extreme necessity to completely exhaust all legal challenges in time for inauguration. By addressing all pending legal issues before the inauguration, Nigeria can ensure the unambiguous status of the duly elected leader, restore faith in the democratic process and maintain stability within the country.
A constitutional review will safeguard the integrity of the democratic system, protect the rights of citizens and uphold the principles of justice and fairness. It is an essential step toward ensuring a more transparent and accountable governance framework in Nigeria. By embarking on this review, Nigeria can set an example for other nations facing similar challenges and strengthen its democratic foundations for the benefit of its people and the overall progress of the nation. Our African neighbours Kenyan successfully upturned the results of elections held on August 8 at the country’s Supreme Court by September 5. In less than one month last year, the challenges were completed and a judgement delivered in the country’s highest court sitting as the final and sole judicial arbiter of presidential election disputes.
It is therefore most imperative that Nigeria conducts a comprehensive constitutional review for this to happen expeditiously as possible before inauguration. This review would address the existing legal challenges before the presidential inauguration takes place, ensuring a fair and conclusive resolution. By prioritising constitutional reforms, Nigeria can uphold the unequivocal status of the duly elected leader and maintain the stability and credibility of its democratic system.
The act of pronouncing a candidate as winner of an election, with all the pomp and pageantry of the inauguration, while the result is still being challenged, lacks logical coherence and undermines the integrity of the electoral process. We must do better than this and stop this merry-go-round of producing winners whose mandates are overshadowed by pending court cases. This does not bode well for the system as it often elevates presumed winners that do not enjoy the support and regard of the people, ultimately weakening the democratic fabric of the nation.
Although legal representatives of presidential candidates Peter Obi and Atiku Abubakar firmly believe that the court still retains the authority to overturn the election outcome, even after Tinubu’s inauguration, it is not a practice that serves the country effectively. It perpetuates the notion that the inauguration is merely a ceremonial event and does not bind the court, which truly underlines the significance of the ongoing legal proceedings.
Still, the protests against the inauguration did not abate as a result. A significant challenge in addressing the protests lies in the absence of a specific legal framework explicitly stating that persons with ongoing court cases should not be sworn into office.
Despite the concerns and criticism, the lack of a definitive provision hinders the prevention of winners from assuming office before the resolution of legal disputes. That is why I insist that to effectively address this issue, Nigeria needs to undertake a constitutional review and amend its constitution and electoral act. Incorporating provisions that stipulate the completion of the judicial intervention before the swearing-in can occur would provide a clear legal basis for ensuring justice, fairness, and the rule of law in the inauguration process.
An amendment to the constitution and electoral act that allows the electoral commission conduct elections early to give time for all legal disputes to be resolved before May 29 can strengthen the democratic processes and ensure that only legitimate winners take the oath of office.
This constitutional review should aim to establish clear guidelines, provisions, and safeguards that promote justice, fairness, and transparency in the inauguration process. Only through such reforms can Nigeria progress towards a more inclusive, accountable, and democratic society.
