As legal tussle over the presidential poll shifts to the Supreme Court, KUNLE ODEREMI examines the gradual buildup to the historic election matter that has been eliciting so much passion and tension.
EIGHT months after the general election, the dust over the outcome still rages. Two friends and arch rival in the election of February 25 presidential pool: President Bola Tinubu and former Vice President Atiku Abubarka are enmeshed in issues surrounding the processes leading to the poll, the election proper and the eventual results of the seventh general election since the return of civil rule by the country on May 29, 1999. From the initial five contenders that went to the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal (PEPT) after the poll, the contest over the winner declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has narrowed down to two: Tinubu and Atiku as the battle shifts to the Supreme Court in what could be regarded as the final phase in the titanic fight.
For most Nigerians, the legal tussle over the February 25 presidential election is becoming another phenomenal phase in the history of such polls. All in the history of the country. It is almost reminiscent of what happened in 1979 after the presidential election under Olusegun Obasanjo as military head of state. The country and the indeed the international community were held spellbound during the prolonged and tortuous legal journey and fireworks that brought into Nigeria’s lexicon the twelve-two thirds jigsaw. The petition filed by and the irrepressible political sage, Chief Obafemi Awolowo challenging the declaration as winner of Alhaji Shehu Shagari of the defunct National Party of Nigeria (NPN)by the National Electoral Commission (NEC) further enriched the political system of the country; the matter has constituted a reference point in the nation’s jurisprudence.
The current tug of war between President Tinubu and Atiku over this year’s presidential election also brings back the memory about the numerous legal steps that were embarked upon by the immediate past President Muhammadu Buhari, following controversial election conducted by President Olusegun Obasanjo’s administration. How far the ongoing legal battle between Tinubu and Atiku will go in deepening the ethos of democracy and rule of law remains in the belly of time. Suffice to say that at the moment, Nigerians and the entire world are glued to the two eminent politicians at the centre of the ongoing roforo fight, to use the common parlance.
The extant laws allow aggrieved candidates to seek legal redress after an election. This underscores the campaign that issues surrounding elections before the tribunal ought to be concluded before the inauguration of elected public officials to lower political temperature and douse tension after general election. The belief is that this will also engender or create a congenial climate and environment for those elected to deliver good governance and leadership; avoid distraction and dissipation of energy by all parties involved on post election matters as being witnessed over the years. In the opinion of some observers, the current brickbat over the 2023 poll has impact negatively on the image of the country.
It would recalled that following the INEC declaration of Tinubu as the winner of the election, three parties and their candidates filed objections with the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) sitting at the Court of Appeal in Abuja. These included Peter Obi and his party, the Labour Party, the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) Alhaji Abubakar Atiku and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). In the separate petitions, they sought the nullification of Tinubu’s election on the grounds of substantial non compliance with the Constitution, the Electoral Act and the guidelines by the INEC for the conduct of the election, as well as an alleged double nomination of Vice President Kashim Shettima. They also argued that Tinubu was not qualified to contest the said election and that his declaration and return as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is illegal, null and void.
The relationship between Tinubu and Atiku which began in the days of the defunct Social Democratic Party (SDP) during the two-party system of the Babangida military regime, bolstered in 2007. The irreconcilable difference between Obasanjo and Atiku led to his sojourn with Tinubu in the Action Congress of Nigeria ACN) that came out of the ashes and shadow of the once vibrant Alliance for Democracy (AD). Though Atiku became the standard-bearer of the AC, he was unsuccessful at the main election. The bond between Tinubu and Atiku also culminated in Atiku seeking the ticket of the APC, an amalgam of ACN, nPDP, ANPP and a fraction of APGA in 2015, Again, the former vice president was not favoured in the eventual choice of the presidential candidate of the party. Buhari secured the ticket and won the poll, and retained the position against Atiku who returned to PDP and picked Peter Obi as his running mate.
Scisms
The twin issue of betrayal and credibility had been the subject of altercations between them, especially after the choice of running mates for the election. The choice of the them Governor Ifeanyi Okowa of Delta State as running mate by Atiku elicited protests in PDP, which APC tried to latch on during the campaign. Similarly, the decision of Tinubu to have a same faith ticket with former Governor Kashim Shettina as running mate was capitalised on by the Atiku camp to hit the APC candidate below the belt. The verbal war soon degenerated into again, issues of credibility and betrayal against each other. Speaking on Tinubu’s choice of Shettina, Atiku had said his “fundamental disagreement and political departure with Asiwaju [Tinubu] since 2007 was due to the Muslim-Muslim ticket. Remember, I opted out of PDP because of zoning, and together with Asiwaju we formed ACN. Tinubu wanted to be my running mate when I was given the ACN presidential ticket in 2007, but I disagreed. And because of that, he switched his support to the late Umar Yar’Adua. That was the parting point. The Muslim-Muslim ticket has always been my fundamental disagreement. Nigeria is a multi-ethnic and multi-religious nation, and there should be a religious balance in our leadership.”
The camp of Tinubu immediately countered the Atiku’s camp on the same issues. Tinubu had said: “In 2007 election, Atiku over rated himself, thinking he could defeat the PDP candidate, Yar’Adua. It is the same thing he is doing today; overrating him by saying ‘I’m going to beat Shettima and Tinubu in the North East. I will win majority of the votes.’ But he is overrating himself. In 2007, even though the election was flawed, he lost Yar’Adua too was a bit not happy the way the election held but he beat Atiku mercilessly. Then ACN was not a national force with national spread as PDP. Atiku thought it was name; that he has political structure all over the place and he was going to beat Yar’Adua but he couldn’t beat Yar’Adua and he started blaming it on Bola Tinubu, falsely accusing him of betraying his party. That is a big lie. The ACN supported him but he was a bad candidate at that time and that is why he lost the election, just like he is a bad candidate now. He even lost his own home state, Adamawa to Buhari in that election. They were three major candidates in that election but he came third and now he is blaming Bola Tinubu.”
On the fast lane
The battle has since moved to a fast lane. The judgment of the PEPT that affirmed the outcome of the election has led to more dramatic twits, especially between President Tinubu and ex-Vice President Atiku. However, in the course of the raging standoff, both leaders had a chance meeting where they exchanged banters. The scene was captured by the media with gusto and glitz, as it tried to underscore what the former vice president said about his relationship with Tinubu in spite the seeming irreconcilable difference in the political space, especially over the same faith ticket. He had said: “We are still friends, of course. But that doesn’t mean we won’t have political differences. We have been having political differences ever since we became friends; nothing unusual about that.” In his press conference held in Abuja last week, Atiku still clarified that his current pursuit should not be misconstrued as being personal. He said: He said: “Our country is bigger than any of us, and its standing in the world affects the fate of all who come from or live in it. As leaders, it is our duty to advance the well-being of all our people and of the country.” He added: “This quest is not for or about Atiku Abubakar. It is a quest for the enthronement of truth, morality, and accountability in our public affairs.”
Final arbiter
Atiku has said he would not give up on the battle until the Supreme Court decides. He spoke of a subtle pressure, claiming that some emissaries approached him shortly after the declaration of the result of the general election. Their mission, he said, was for him to have a rethink over his rejection of the results and sheath his sword. He said the delegation comprised some state governors but that he insisted on pressing ahead with the course he is currently involved.
The schism between the duo of Tinubu and Atiku has split the citizens down the line. It has created crevices in professional bodies, with lawyers and other professionals giving different perspectives as the day of fireworks by counsel for the two figures near.
The twist and turns in the face-off between them also remains central in public discourse in public places and streets, especially on the airwaves. The attendant cacophonies bother an eminent Legal practitioners and former president of the Nigerian Bar Association NBA, Chief Olisa Agbakoba (SAN). He is seriously concerned about the effect of the verbal brawl on the judiciary. Agbakoba wants the authorities in the legal profession in the country to call lawyers to order due to the cacophonies across their rank. Writing in his X handle, he said: “The cacophony of discordant voices on Tinubu / Atiku over the certificate matter is completely out of hand. This utter nonsense from armchair lawyers is heating up Nigeria dangerously. Please can we keep our opinions and views to ourselves awaiting a decision of the Supreme Court. I am so ashamed to see Lawyers on Television arguing one way or the other on the merits or demerits of the Chicago State University matter. This is most unhelpful! I call out all media that tolerate this nonsense of adjudicating the CSU matter on TV and Newspapers. “I urge the President of the Nigerian Bar Association to call out lawyers that breach rules of ethics by turning the media into a Court of Law. Can we please stop heating up our country? Let us allow the Supreme Court of Nigeria to make a judicial pronouncement which is binding on us all!!!! This public nonsense must stop.” One of the sons of the late Chief MKO Abiola, Jamiu also found it discomforting the dimensions the political difference between Tinubu and Atiku has degenerated. He said it has far-reaching implications for the image of the country before the international community. He said: “I wonder when Africans would stop embarrassing our continent abroad as if Africa has not suffered enough.”
READ ALSO FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE
