Mark down and out, Yar’Adua’s odds down  

By Okey Ndibe 

Last Saturday’s invalidation of David Mark’s “election” as a senator provides an occasion for Nigerians to seriously contemplate the grave man-made flaws of their electoral systems. The Benue State Electoral Tribunal ruled, in effect, that Mark’s election was defective, and arose from the disenfranchisement of voters from two local government areas.  

If the tribunal’s verdict stands on appeal—and many legal experts consider it thorough and sound—then the implication is that a stranger had usurped a seat he was not given by the electorate. Mark, let’s not forget, has been functioning as Senate President. If we take our democracy seriously, then it’s about time we weighed the consequences of permitting a poseur to hijack the steering wheel of the nation’s legislative business.  

If Mark’s constituents did not send him to the Senate, then it follows that other forces entrenched him there. Who might these forces be? One is former President Olusegun Obasanjo, whose aborted third term fantasy Mark fervently championed. Another is the hierarchy of the (misruling) Peoples Democratic Party that has squandered billions of dollars of the nation’s resources with little to show for it. There is a faction of the retired military establishment of which Mark is a notorious and unflattering specimen. Mark’s “election” could not have been possible without the connivance of Maurice Iwu whose chairmanship of the nation’s electoral commission has been nothing short of calamitous.  

A Senate President sponsored by a coalition of such negative forces is unlikely to serve his constituents’ best interests. That, in the end, is one of the chief reasons to rusticate all the David Marks that fester in our public life, from the Senate and other legislative bodies to elective executive offices.  

Nigeria is much betrayed by its elite, including David Mark, whose service as a military minister for communications yielded abject failure. Mark compounded that failure with gratuitous insult to Nigerians. Part of his permanent public resume as minister is a dismissive statement that poor Nigerians had no right to aspire to own telephones. Left to Mark, telephones would remain an exclusive status symbol for the nation’s well-heeled, most of them raiders of the public purse. Thanks to such elite disconnection, a Nigeria with all it takes to be a success story has been turned into a dungeon of despair and a metaphor for perennial failure.  

To shake off its wasted legacy and regain a vestige of its promise, Nigerians ought to be in a hurry to catch up. And our challenge is to catch up, not to such countries like Malaysia, South Korea and Singapore that used to belong in our league. No, we’re now a sorry elephantine nation panting far behind Ghana, Uganda, Botswana, and South Africa in the race for development and progress.  

A country in our kind of bind can’t afford to have at the helm of its affairs men and women who are beholden to such rotten entities as Obasanjo and his fellow sowers of perdition. A Nigerian Senate swept clean of hijackers of mandate should be more attuned to the task of using legislative instruments to hasten the nation’s race to achieve an economically and socially viable nation. 

Mark’s fall is cheerful news for a people desperate to find their democratic feet. It’s no surprise that news of his defeat triggered spontaneous celebrations in his home state. Justice C.I. Uriri, who read the verdict, simply delivered music to the ears of Nigerians who care deeply about democracy. 

The Benue State Electoral Tribunal deserves commendation for the dispatch, and remarkable courage, with which it has done its job. By marking Mark down, the tribunal completed the dismissal of all three senators from the state smuggled into the Senate by the PDP. It’s the first tribunal to complete a rout of senators from any one state. It had earlier invalidated the alleged elections of two of the state’s other senators, George Akume and Joseph Akhagerger.  

My hope is that the Justice James Ogebe Presidential Election Tribunal would demonstrate the same patriotic fervor by calling Umar Yar’Adua’s “election” by its proper name: a fraud and an assault on democratic values. Ogebe’s challenge is either to write his name in the history books as the man who spoke intrepidly from the bench in defense of Nigerians’ democratic rights to choose their leaders or who lent himself to the forces sworn to frustrate the nation’s flowering as a polity where the people’s voices come to bear.  

Like Mark, Yar’Adua was not elected. Instead he was selected by Obasanjo as part of the former president’s depraved desire to subordinate a nation of more than 100 million to his puny whims. Even those who believe Yar’Adua to be the answer that Nigeria needs at this time ought to see the wisdom in annulling his purloined, and therefore diseased, mandate. If Yar’Adua is to be an effective leader, and to rise to his full potential in the service of the nation, then he needs a mandate that is not burdened by fraud. He needs a free hand to operate without feeling that he owes his political life to a despot’s self-serving calculations.  

Yar’Adua may well be the nice guy that his handlers have advertised, but that is, finally, beside the point. As “president,” he has been, inevitably, wishy-washy. He leaves the impression of one confounded by the onerous challenge of leadership. Unable to rise above the illogic of his path to office, he has been captive to the dictates of all manner of narrow interests. He is remote-controlled, it is clear, from Ota Farm. As “leaders” go, he has been a sorry sight to behold, his statecraft marked by hesitancy where decisiveness was called for, paralysis where agility was required.  

The point is this: that the best guarantee that a leader would serve the public interest, and be accountable to the citizenry, is to assure that such a leader’s mandate emanates from the unfettered will of the people. Those who believe in Yar’Adua’s soundness for the job of president, and who swear by his sense of mission, ought to wish for the man’s rescue from the encumbrance of his “election.” In one of the admirable pronouncements of his time in Abuja, Yar’Adua has acknowledged that he is the beneficiary of an election fraught with malpractices. He spoke the truth, even if he chose to do so in euphemistic language. He has also argued that he would have won in a transparent contest. That strikes me both as a lie and an act of grave self-indictment.  

Given the degree to which Nigerians loathe Obasanjo, and the public perception that Yar’Adua was chosen by the former president as a man to be trusted with cloaking Obasanjo’s manifold crimes, Nigerians would have had to act counter-intuitively to vote for Yar’Adua. But even if we allow, for the sake of argument, that Yar’Adua would have won fairly, then his cooperation in a massively rigged election becomes even more grievous and unforgivable.  

Assuming that Ogebe debunks INEC’s lie that the presidential polls were credibly conducted, Yar’Adua should now take his political life in his hands. He should make his case to Nigerians as to why he considers himself the man that fits the current Nigerian moment. He should submit his credentials, as governor and impostor-president, to the scrutiny of the Nigerian people. Above all, he must convince Nigerians that when he speaks, they may rest assured that it is Yar’Adua speaking rather than Obasanjo borrowing his voice.  

Possessed of no powers of clairvoyance, I cannot presume to know how Justice Ogebe and his colleagues are going to rule today. But I sure hope the tribunal has the courage to undo the rape of the Nigerian voter that was consummated on April 21, 2007.  

Regardless of the tribunal’s verdict, Nigerians ought to brook no confusion about one man, Maurice Iwu. Each passing day, the world receives new information that illuminates the scale of Iwu’s connivance in a series of electoral heists. Iwu’s hired apologists may write as shamelessly as they wish to put a gloss on his disastrous record, but sensible people cannot be fooled. It is beyond partisan politics: Iwu ought to go, and now is the time to boot him from his perch.  

Iwu’s leadership is called to question each time a tribunal throws another “election” in the trash bin. In Benue State senatorial races, Iwu and his commission have scored zero percent! Lest we forget, more than three hundred Nigerians perished in the violence that attended Iwu’s sham of an election. To leave Iwu in an office he has devalued is to betray the memory of those who died needlessly in an orchestrated deception. Nigeria wasted billions of naira in an exercise that was designed to be a travesty, and each naira of those billions might have gone into more meaningful national investments. Iwu should be facing a jury, not thumping his chest at decent society while falsely accusing himself of being an accomplished electoral umpire. 
 

Lamidi Adedibu and other matters: 

Who governs Nigeria? The answer to the question, I’m afraid, is: Lamidi Adedibu. A few weeks ago, Mr. Olusegun Obasanjo declared himself Adedibu’s disciple. A disciple is one who derives his outlook and models his actions on a venerable figure. Shortly after Obasanjo’s enlightening proclamation, Yar’Adua told a wedding crowd in Ota that Obasanjo was “my leader.” You get the point? What Obasanjo learnt from his Molete guru he has passed along to his Aso Rock surrogate. Any wonder, then, that Nigeria is trapped in an Adedibu state of material degradation and moral dishevelment.   

Several readers wrote to ask what I thought about Mr. Andy Uba’s recent “victory” at the Appeal Court in Enugu. My response came in two parts. One, as a versed lawyer friend told me, the paper the judgment is typed on has more value than the judgment itself. Two, one should not begrudge Uba his fantasy of being Anambra’s “governor-in-waiting.” In a flush of generosity, one in fact wishes him to be governor-in-waiting in perpetuity!  

As for Justice Muktar Coomasie who reportedly wrote the verdict, the curiosity is that the man then got nominated for a seat on the Supreme Court.  

Robot  Villager

# 1 Mark down and out, Yar’Adua’s odds down B...Read the full article. Posted by Robot| 25.02.2008 14:53

dele26  Villager

# 2 Several readers wrote to ask what I thought about Mr. Andy Uba’s recent “victory” at the Appeal Court in Enugu. My response came in two parts. One, as a versed lawyer friend told me, the paper the judgment is typed on has more value than the judgment itself. Two, one should not begrudge Uba his fantasy of being Anambra’s “governor-in-waiting.” In a flush of generosity, one in fact wishes him to be governor-in-waiting in perpetuity! As for Justice Muktar Coomasie who reportedly wrote the verdict, the curiosity is that the man then got nominated for a seat on the Supreme Court. Professor Ndibe Does the paper that the judgment on David Mark was read from have more value than the judgment itself?????? I pray the Election Petitions Tribunal will have lips big enough to cover these protruding teeth!!!! Posted by dele26| 25.02.2008 16:04

Chidi Giniji  Villager

# 3 Hmmm, ON, you have indeed elevated journalistic essaying onto numismatic hights! Hear him; "The point is this: that the best guarantee that a leader would serve the public interest, and be accountable to the citizenry, is to assure that such a leader’s mandate emanates from the unfettered will of the people. Those who believe in Yar’Adua’s soundness for the job of president, and who swear by his sense of mission, ought to wish for the man’s rescue from the encumbrance of his “election.”" Nwanna, keep writing, I am collecting. Posted by Chidi Giniji| 25.02.2008 17:21

Ofunwa Villager  Villager

# 4 Thank you Ndibe. However, In all of these glorious rulings by various election tribunals, the mother of all justice would be served only on the day Obasanjo and Iwu would be tried and sentenced for crimes against the Nigerian people. Obasanjo particularly, that murderer and looter of national treasury does not deserve any more minute outside a maximum security prison. That day will come surely but until then, Ndibe continue to fire i am solidly behind you. Posted by Ofunwa Villager| 25.02.2008 18:33

gwobezentashi  Villager

# 5 When Tomorrow Comes Sam Nda-Isaiah Tomorrow, Tuesday, February 26, 2008, the Presidential Petitions Appeal Tribunal will deliver its judgement. It is 10 whole months since the April 2007 presidential election. So, the first problem with that is that if you are an aggrieved party, and you are one of the remaining few that still believe that the judiciary is the last resort of the oppressed and therefore do not wish to go the Kenyan way, then you will have to wait for one year to get justice. The message is that even if the court is going to remove election riggers, as they should, the riggers would have enjoyed one year in office, which is quite enough for any unscrupulous leader to steal the nation dry. So, in a sense, no matter how the verdict goes tomorrow, our judiciary system is still very friendly to crooks and therefore needs reforms. Whichever way anyone looks at the verdict that will emerge tomorrow, it is the judiciary that is on trial. Not Umaru Yar'Adua, Muhammadu Buhari, Atiku Abubakar, INEC or even its wonderful chairman, Maurice Iwu. The world has already formed its impression about INEC, and Iwu's children would not like to hear that impression, and we intend to move forward for good or for ill. In the aftermath of the 2003 general elections, and in spite of all we knew, the judiciary headed by Justice Muhammadu Uwais didn't annul a single election. Well, it annulled one, the one "won" by Dr Chris Ngige, which Obasanjo conveniently wanted annulled. Apart from this, it legitimised all the wanton rigging that Obasanjo and then Vice President Atiku Abubakar carried out. The world knew that the judiciary under Uwais had virtually collapsed and was no longer useful to anyone. Justice Modibbo Alfa Belgore came and there were improvements, but, since there were no elections to uphold or annul, it was difficult to fully assess his tenure. His tenure was, however, far more respectable than that of his predecessor. But Nigerians apparently hold a lot of esteem for the current judicial system under Justice Idris Kutigi. So far, the confidence does not appear misplaced but it is what happens tomorrow that will really show the stuff that the current judiciary is made of. Because of the millions, and even billions, of naira of election slush fund that is spread around during elections in Nigeria, it is only through election petition verdicts that the integrity of judges can fully be evaluated. Justice Umaru Abdullahi, the Court of Appeal president, informed the nation last year that the judges were under intense pressure from candidates to influence the outcome of the election petitions. There were also attempts to bribe them, he revealed, but he refused to divulge the names of the culprits, which is the only correct thing that a man of justice like him should have done. Forget all the jargons and technicalities, people always know when elections should be annulled or even upheld. For instance, no Nigerian expected Olu Falae's petition against Obasanjo's election in 1999 to hold water. And if, for instance, the senatorial election in Agatu and Okpokwu local government areas of Benue State were not annulled two days ago by the election petitions tribunal sitting in Makurdi, in the petition against Senator David Mark, Nigerians would have reached their own conclusions about what happened. There are only two ways the verdict can go tomorrow. Yar'Adua's election will either be annulled or upheld. There is already a sense of foreboding around the world (not just Nigeria) that something is about to happen to Yar'Adua's election. I have received several calls from overseas and emails analysing the situation. The entire election monitors, both local and foreign, including even Yar'Adua himself, have already given an indication of what happened in 2007. We all knew that the 2003 elections were rigged with the aid of Tafa Balogun, the IG. But the 2007 elections were even far worse. Dr Abel Guobadia now looks like a God-fearing man compared to Prof. Maurice Iwu, who is certainly and most definitely an evil man. That was why when Yar'Adua himself decided to tell the truth about the elections, he earned brownie points. He went further to even constitute an electoral reform committee. So, only a joker will tell the world tomorrow that there was nothing wrong with the 2007 presidential election. Someone implied in a write-up yesterday that the tribunal may uphold the election in the "national interest". I asked if he knew the definition of "national interest". Obasanjo in cahoots with Iwu had made a nonsense of democracy and rigged the election beyond reason and someone is talking about upholding the elections in the "national interest". Do you act in the "national interest" by legitimising a fraud and an injustice? No! That is not statecraft and Nigeria needs to be very careful. We need to start taking decisions responsibly. I am sure we still remember the popular saying that a nation can survive ungodliness but no nation has ever survived injustice. The only national interest here would be to restore democracy. We can never go wrong by doing the right thing. And the right thing here is that if the elections were rigged and did not meet the standard of a democracy, they should be annulled, pure and simple. Yar'Adua and his men have let it be known that he (Yar'Adua) would still have won anyway even if the elections had not been rigged. But that's a mute point. The only germane point is that the election had been rigged beyond what could be called a democracy and should therefore be annulled. Annulling the rigged election tomorrow would be the president's opportunity to prove to the world that he would have won the election anyway! And, in fact, I am one of those who believe he has a fighting chance of winning because even though several Nigerians would prefer him to be more purposeful in his presidential style, he has taken some very popular decisions in the last nine months. He has cancelled the sale of the Kaduna and Port Harcourt refineries, he has in principle confiscated NITEL/MTEL from Transcorp, he has cancelled several contracts awarded by his benefactor. He has also been singing the right tunes about the rule of law and electoral reforms. He even has a better chance of winning now than he ever had during the elections last year, when he was virtually unknown and untested by Nigerians. Yar'Adua's image would, in fact, become larger than life if the election is annulled. It would prove that, unlike Obasanjo, he did not interfere with the outcome of the petition against him, and that alone will be a very big and credible election campaign point for him. But if the tribunal should emerge tomorrow to say Yar'Adua was duly elected last year, then this little gain he has made would evaporate. His rule of law mantra would just become like Obasanjo's anti-corruption programme which has made him a laughing stock. He would have to disband his Electoral Reform Committee immediately because the judgement would have meant that the committee was unnecessary in the first place. If he won the election, why do we need an electoral reform committee? Everybody would jeer at him. People would then have a context for last week's curious elevation of Justice James Ogebe to the Supreme Court. Already, conspiracy theorists are beginning to say that the judgement on David Mark's petition had to be hurriedly disposed of, so as to create the alibi for upholding the election by saying that there is no credible Senate president in place to take over. That would then make a case for upholding the election on grounds of "national security" plausible. But that would amount to being clever by half. Nigerians are not stupid. And for the avoidance of doubt, there will absolutely be no crisis if the presidential election is annulled. If the presidential election is not annulled, then all the gains of the judiciary in the last one year will come to naught. The message would be that every Nigerian is free to plan to become president of the country by any means possible, including through a military coup. And one more thing. If the election is not annulled, there will not be any Kenyan style street justice. Nigerians don't have that history. It's the Kenyans that still remember their days of the mau mau resistance. Nigerians have apparently been spoilt by their military. http://www.leadershipnigeria.com/product_info.php?products_id=22966&action=process Posted by gwobezentashi| 25.02.2008 18:35

lixolman  JJC

# 6 Let rational-minded Nigerians take a minute to reflect on the long-term (probably short-term) effects of these on-going litigations on our nation’s economy. I have often yearned, like other well-intended Nigerians, for a perfect society. Such societies where elected officials will, at every point in time, reflect the mandate of the populace. However, given the age of our democracy and other negating factors inherent in our society, it is hard to forecast when such a dream will be actualized. For crying out loud, America, the grandfather of democracy is still struggling to perfect its electoral system. One thing America does NOT do when confronted with marred electoral process, be it presidential, is take an unending litigious approach with the hope of a positive outcome. America often acknowledges the faults, makes notations of the root-causes, enlightens the people, devises corrective measures and be better prepared for the next election. I am sure such measures may not strike one as appropriate but in reality they are when one factors the social and economic impacts of interminable litigations. I am not insinuating that people's rights should not better be served; my concern, however, is the long-term effect of these litigious processes on our nation's economy. As we all know, it takes a lot of money to embark on litigation. Let us consider possible chain reactions: • Government officials will take their eyes off of pressing issues and nothing gets accomplished. • Feeling of insecurity will overtake elected (or selected) officials, which will result in diversion of public funds to personal accounts due to the uncertainty of their offices. • The military will see a loophole to take over power; plunging us, yet again, into another decades of darkness. We need to take the American approach and move on! Felix Ukeh, Posted by lixolman| 25.02.2008 18:50

bob  Villager

# 7 =lixolman;4294991649>Let rational-minded Nigerians take a minute to reflect on the long-term (probably short-term) effects of these on-going litigations on our nation’s economy. I have often yearned, like other well-intended Nigerians, for a perfect society. Such societies where elected officials will, at every point in time, reflect the mandate of the populace. However, given the age of our democracy and other negating factors inherent in our society, it is hard to forecast when such a dream will be actualized. For crying out loud, America, the grandfather of democracy is still struggling to perfect its electoral system. One thing America does NOT do when confronted with marred electoral process, be it presidential, is take an unending litigious approach with the hope of a positive outcome. America often acknowledges the faults, makes notations of the root-causes, enlightens the people, devises corrective measures and be better prepared for the next election. I am sure such measures may not strike one as appropriate but in reality they are when one factors the social and economic impacts of interminable litigations. I am not insinuating that people's rights should not better be served; my concern, however, is the long-term effect of these litigious processes on our nation's economy. As we all know, it takes a lot of money to embark on litigation. Let us consider possible chain reactions: • Government officials will take their eyes off of pressing issues and nothing gets accomplished. • Feeling of insecurity will overtake elected (or selected) officials, which will result in diversion of public funds to personal accounts due to the uncertainty of their offices. • The military will see a loophole to take over power; plunging us, yet again, into another decades of darkness. We need to take the American approach and move on! Felix Ukeh, lixolman, go and sit down! (if u are standing) even the americans contest results in court and appeal unfavorable decisions. they also recount ballots. iwu on the other hand did not even finish counting, talkless of recount, before announcing results. ALL the april elections should not stand. Posted by bob| 25.02.2008 19:48

dapxin  Villager

# 8 As it goes, its already Super Tuesday morning, and according to http://www.tribune.com.ng/26022008/news/news1.html judgement is to come on NTA and AIT live. I wonder, who has NTA or AIT via satellite among villagers, who can put it onto Sopcast or TVU streaming for the rest of us ? I 'd want to see this and I hope someone in here has access with + broadband so can stream for us. Waiting... Posted by dapxin| 25.02.2008 19:51

dapxin  Villager

# 9 =lixolman;4294991649>Let rational-minded Nigerians take a minute to reflect on the long-term (probably short-term) effects of these on-going litigations on our nation’s economy. I have often yearned, like other well-intended Nigerians, for a perfect society. Such societies where elected officials will, at every point in time, reflect the mandate of the populace. However, given the age of our democracy and other negating factors inherent in our society, it is hard to forecast when such a dream will be actualized. For crying out loud, America, the grandfather of democracy is still struggling to perfect its electoral system. One thing America does NOT do when confronted with marred electoral process, be it presidential, is take an unending litigious approach with the hope of a positive outcome. America often acknowledges the faults, makes notations of the root-causes, enlightens the people, devises corrective measures and be better prepared for the next election. I am sure such measures may not strike one as appropriate but in reality they are when one factors the social and economic impacts of interminable litigations. I am not insinuating that people's rights should not better be served; my concern, however, is the long-term effect of these litigious processes on our nation's economy. As we all know, it takes a lot of money to embark on litigation. Let us consider possible chain reactions: • Government officials will take their eyes off of pressing issues and nothing gets accomplished. • Feeling of insecurity will overtake elected (or selected) officials, which will result in diversion of public funds to personal accounts due to the uncertainty of their offices. • The military will see a loophole to take over power; plunging us, yet again, into another decades of darkness. We need to take the American approach and move on! Felix Ukeh, As academic as I was first tempted to dismiss this, the reality is - in a nation so deeply flawed along ethnicity and tendency towards mediocrity on serious national issues, we cannot possibly talk of anything progressive, until we sink it absolutely in, that elections - the fundamental premise on which democrazy thrives, cannot be rigged, and if they are, will be challeged at whatever cost. We can take next-gen steps from then on, but mark me, there is nothing comparable to a Judiciary in activist mode. Infact, nothing so comforting, and for a moment, I think the judiciary has done a job so good, that some of us that would have voted for the Kenyan reaction last year are suprised, if not totally shocked.... Its is absolutely comforting that we are as a collection of people, disproves - even if in marginal terms - the notion that "we only know of savage methodologies regaring dispute resolution". Today is a grandslam final for project Nigeria. It could deepen the eternal HOPE for light at the end of the tunnel, that majority of us has spent a lifetime maintaining. Its all in the courts of Justices Ogbeche et al. Its exactly 8hours to go....May our days be long. Posted by dapxin| 25.02.2008 20:01

Oguguo Yakere  Villager

# 10 Felix Ukeh, I want to believe that you do not mean what you wrote above. Otherwise what money are you trying to save, is it the one those you want us to leave in power to carry on their nefarious activities are busy stealing having stacked away more than enough before this time? Or is it the wasted funds on the election that never was? Or is it the money that you will (so called) save only to be carted away by the crooks that forced themselves on the people through their selections? Are you a penny wise pound foolish man? Please stop using America as an excuse to perpetrate evil in a land that is already saturated with it. We should be ready to waste the money if that will clean up the land, my friend. Posted by Oguguo Yakere| 25.02.2008 22:13

---

The conversation continues in our forum. Click here to read all comments

---