Politics
Candidates’ Swap: INEC Advises Agrieved Aspirants To Go To Court
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has advised aspirants of different political parties who felt marginalised during the just-concluded primaries to approach any Federal High Court for redress.
INEC’s National Commissioner of Information and Voter Education, Festus Okoye, who appeared on a television programme on Monday morning, gave the advice while answering questions on the fate of Senate President, Ahmad Lawan of Yobe North Senatorial District and immediate past Minister of Niger Delta Affairs, Godswill Akpabio of Akwa North West Senatorial District in the 2023 elections.
Recall that while Senator Lawan was battling for the All Progressives Congress (APC) presidential ticket, Bashir Sheriff Machina was declared the winner of the Yobe North Senatorial District primary election.
However, Machina has threatened to go to court to reclaim his mandate as the APC sent the name of Lawan to the electoral body for clearance.
Recall also that Akpabio had won the re-run initially won by Obongemem Ekperikpe Ekpo who reliable sources confided in The Tide source had withdrawn for Akpabio in line with the provision of the Electoral Act, 2022.
However, Okoye said he had not come across the names of candidates submitted by political parties, though viral report has it that the APC at national level had replaced the name of Machina with that of Lawan.
From INEC’s explanation, Lawan or any individual in his position is left at the mercy of the aspirants who have been legally and constitutionally nominated by their political parties.
Okoye said that the Commission monitored and has the reports of all the senatorial and House of Representatives primaries, adding that properly nominated candidates must write to INEC with a sworn affidavit, asking for a fresh primary, which would be conducted within 14 days before a replacement can be made.
He further advised Machina and others whose mandates have been taken from them to approach a well-constituted court of law to seek redress since INEC already has the reports from the primaries.
“I completely agree with you that someone who has not contested party’s primary should not be in a position to be nominated as party’s candidate,” Okoye said.
“But now the Independent National Electoral Commission is not in a position as at now to make a determination in relation to what you’re saying or to make a determination in relation to whose name was submitted by a political party.
“The Commission monitored the primaries of different political parties. Their senatorial and House of Representatives primaries and we have our reports. So if somebody emerged from the party primary and someone else’s name is submitted, it is the duty of that particular individual to utilise Section 285 of the Constitution, Section 84 and 29 of the Electoral Act to seek redress in a constituted court of law.
“Moreover, what the law provides is that at the end of this nomination process, if any of the candidates that have been properly and constitutional nominated withdraws in writing and sworn affidavit that the ‘political party that nominated me must and shall conduct fresh primaries within the period of 14 days and then make such replacement.’
“Then the person must do this through a letter submitted to the political party that nominated him with an affidavit indicating that he or she has voluntarily withdrawn. So that is the state of the law as at today,” he stated.
Section 84(14) of Electoral Act, 2022 says Notwithstanding the provisions of this Act or rules of a political party, an aspirant who complains that any of the provisions of this Act and the guidelines of a political party have not been complied with in the selection or nomination of a candidate of a political party for election, may apply to the Federal High Court for redress.
But, the caveat for candidates is enshrined in 84(13) of the Act which stipulates Where a political party fails to comply with the provisions of this Act in the conduct of its primaries, its candidate for election shall not be included in the election for the particular position in issue.
Mr Rhodes-Vivour expressed concern over the development, saying a dangerous precedent was being set.
He said: “What we witnessed at the House of Assembly represents a troubling pattern where might is increasingly valued over right. This forceful seizure of the legislative chambers undermines the very foundations of our democracy and sends a disturbing message about how power is wielded in our state.”
Mr Rhodes-Vivour criticised the ruling party in Lagos, accusing it of systematically promoting thuggery and violence over ideas.
He argued that such actions have eroded public trust in governance and weakened democratic values that should preserve the rule of law.
He said: “For too long, Lagos politics has been defined by intimidation rather than inspiration, by coercion rather than conviction. The ruling party has consistently demonstrated a willingness to use force to have its way notwithstanding the popular will of the people.”
Mr Rhodes-Vivour urged Lagosians to take the current crisis as a wake-up call ahead of future elections, saying voters should prioritise candidates who demonstrate character, competence and compassion regardless of party affiliation.
“The quality of our democracy depends entirely on the quality of individuals we elect to represent us. Lagosians deserve leaders who view public office as a sacred trust rather than a platform for personal aggrandizement”, he said.
In a statement, signed by its spokesman, Mr Chika Adiele, the group warned that the judiciary would be held responsible for any breakdown of law and order in Rivers State.
They expressed shock over the verdict, warning that it could disrupt the peace and development efforts of Governor Siminalayi Fubara.
The statement read in part: “The attention of the pan-Niger Delta Youths Empowerment Forum, under the leadership of Comrade Maobu Nangi Obu, has been drawn to the shocking verdict of the Supreme Court of Nigeria ordering seizure of Rivers State’s allocation. This is nothing short of economic sabotage against Rivers people.
“The apex Niger Delta youths body is dismayed by the infantile antics of anti-democratic forces whose stock in trade is brewing crisis in a bid to topple the people’s Governor. We firmly condemn this judgement as it is against the tenet of the constitution of Nigeria.
“It is an invitation to war and against equity, justice, and fair play. We equally condemn the order nullifying the local government election as reckless and vindictive.
“Unfortunately, the justices of the Supreme Court positioned themselves as a party to the suit rather than impartial arbiters of justice.”
They urged Nigerians to note that the principle of democracy is rooted in sound constitutional pronouncements with a view to establishing justice. “Therefore, any attempt by the enemies of Rivers people to seize power by judicial fiat will be resisted by the Niger Delta youths.
“We cannot be cowed, neither shall we lay in surrender at the altar of political manipulations of rascals. We reiterate boldly, once again, that anyone, no matter how highly placed, will face fierce resistance by the majority of Rivers people,” they said.
Former Senate Minority Leader, Senator Biodun Olujimi, has appealed to Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, the senator representing Kogi Central, to withdraw her suit against Senate President Godswill Akpabio.
Speaking during a live television interview on Saturday, Senator Olujimi said she does not want women to “look emotionally unstable”.
On February 20, Senator Akpabio, the senate president, and Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan engaged in a heated debate during plenary over a change in seating arrangements.
On February 25, the senate referred Akpoti-Uduaghan to the committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions for disciplinary review.
However, the Kogi senator filed a N100 billion defamation suit against Senator Akpabio over an alleged defamatory statement reportedly made by the senate president’s legislative aide.
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan later alleged that her trouble in the senate began after she rejected sexual advances from Senator Akpabio.
Reacting to the development, Senator Olujimi said a senator cannot speak outside the assigned seat according to the senate rule.
The former lawmaker said the request of the Kogi senator that her senate probe proceedings should be broadcast live was a “little overboard.”
She added that the clash between the senate president and Akpoti-Uduaghan should not have been escalated, noting that the change in seating arrangements is a normal phenomenon in the red chamber.
The former senate minority leader expressed support for the probe of Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s “weighty” allegations against Senator Akpabio.
She said Senator Akpabio is someone who jokes a lot, adding that the senate president usually made fun of everything.
“I want to say that in the 8th and 9th senate, we never had anything like that (referring to the allegations), and Senator Akpabio was one of us.
“They treated us (female senators) with decorum. We did not have anything like that, and I have not heard anything of such from any other of the remaining senators.
“It is tough for me to be able to take that without proper investigation. There should be an investigation.
“He (Akpabio) jokes a lot. He is fond of making little fun out of everything. He loves to make everything light; when you do that, you become very vulnerable.
“I saw all that they (referring to male senators) went through as men when I was there. They were all victimised by people from outside. I had to rescue them all of the time.
“The court case, I want to appeal to her to take the case out of court. We don’t want women to look like they are emotionally unstable.
“We need to also be strong enough to face the men. Going to court against a presiding officer is not on. I know she is hurt, but she needs to handle it in a better way. I think that should get out of court as fast as possible”, Senator Olujimi said.