The phrase “when the head is rotten, the whole body stinks” lives in my head rent-free because of how the unethical leadership in Nigeria negatively impacts the entire system. I refer to the leadership in the three arms of government. The Legislature is expected to make the laws, the Executive puts those laws into effect and plans policy, and the Judiciary administers justice by interpreting the law when its meaning is in dispute, ensuring the law is upheld.
The elites within these arms of government have become dishonest and incompetent, leading to dysfunction in the entire system. And in this age of post-truth political culture—an era where emotions and opinions have a stronger influence than objective facts and evidence—bad governance gets justified with misinformation. This is where we find ourselves in Nigeria.
Perhaps, from the three, the arm of government none is expected to serve as a better example of changing attitudes towards the country’s institutions than the Judiciary. However, Nigerian justices are comfortable to be viewed through a lens of partisanship. They take pride in being part of the political play and show interest in delivering their side’s goals rather than as unbiased legal thinkers.
Traditional ideas of law hold that judges and justices make decisions based on a dispassionate application of the law to the facts at hand, with no regard for the political ramifications of that decision. While Nigerian justices are expected to behave this way, a key section has transformed into politicians and proudly so. Recall the CJN’s speech that he is happy that Makinde is part of the G5.
Similarly, the selected judges presiding over the election tribunal petitions and their appeals have been alleged to be political actors and are using the law to achieve that goal. This is due to how they subjectively deliver judgements, adding to the widespread inconsistencies in their judgements. That is why there is a call within the judicial circle for the Supreme Court’s ruling to be subject to legislative review.
Objectively speaking, aside from the human element in their law profession, post-truth politics has played a role in driving them to deliver inconsistent judgements across the country, from the presidential election tribunal to the Kano State gubernatorial election judgement to that of Kaduna. Seemingly, these elite judges seem to use different rule books to deliver their judgments.
The justices have left Nigerians and global watchers dumbfounded with their inconsistent judgements, for example, regarding the power to cancel votes given evidence of electoral misconduct. The judges claim to have the power to cancel over 165, 000 votes in Kano but claim not to have such powers in Kaduna State’s gubernatorial election petition and at the PEPT. In Kaduna, the judges even opined a judgment against the prayers of the petitioners and the respondents.
As INEC did, most other parties have appealed the tribunal judgements, showing the lack of trust in the system. Also, history shows that when judicial decisions are appealed in higher courts, the judges are never found wanting for their inconsistencies and biases. The underlying cause of the breakdown in the system is the leadership and the political affiliation of these elite judges. Again, when the leadership is rotten, then the whole system stinks.
Presently, there is an appeal against the PEPC judgement before the Supreme Court by Atiku and Peter Obi. Atiku’s legal challenge relates to the fake certificate Tinubu presented to the INEC. Section 137 of the Constitution disqualifies a presidential candidate from presenting a forged certificate to INEC. The Chicago State University (CSU) affirmed in court that the certificate presented by Tinubu to INEC is not theirs, which is a cultured language for saying it is a fake.
In his application to the university, Tinubu’s gender is female; he is a US citizen, and the secondary school he claimed to have attended in 1970 was only established in 1974. His year of birth is mixed: On his transcript, it is 1954; on his application, it is 1955; On his INEC form, it is 1952. Lastly, the letter A in his name has changed to Adekunle in his NYSC certificate.
Conversely, Tinubu made his rebuttal, and his supporters have come up with an overload of alternative facts. He claimed to have used an unnamed third party to print the certificate he presented to INEC. However, CSU has clarified that they do not entertain third-party certificate orders during the court deposition by Atiku’s lawyers in America. All the evidence has been presented to the Supreme Court, but many are worried that post-truth politics has a strong chance of driving the decision of the elite justices.
So, here is a note to the elite Supreme Court justices selected to decide on the appeal against the PEPC judgement: they must not forget that the world is watching. I remind them that posterity will judge them. If they choose to be rotten, they will be remembered for making the judicial system and Nigeria, by extension, reek of immorality. They must refuse post-truth politics and should brace the objective evidence presented to them. But this is if, at all, they care for Nigeria’s future and reputation.
