The verdict is in! A referee can officiate? An umpire can control a tournament? I would have thought this, rhetorical! It goes without saying, a referee, an umpire has authority!

Now; Let the game begin!

An Appeals Court in Nigeria has finally answered a vexing question and has therefore laid to rest, whether or not, Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, has the power or authority to disqualify candidates for elections in Nigeria. The five persons, Appeals Court decision was unanimous. A reversal on appeal to the Supreme Court of Nigeria, is highly unlikely!

It is now settled law, that INEC do, indeed have the authority, through the Electoral Act and the Constitution of Nigeria, to determine who qualifies as candidates for elections in Nigeria, according to our laws. This interpretation by the Appeals Court meets good legal reasoning and it is also in accord with common sense!

The Appeals Court and indeed, any reasonable person could not have come to a different conclusion!

The only question to be resolved was, what is the purpose of INEC? If that question is answered satisfactorily, it would and should become clear to all, that INEC is a regulatory body, and all regulatory bodies do have and should have power to make determinations, determinations in compliance with the laws and constitution, coupled with the exercise of reasonable discretion and sense of responsibility.

Opponents of INEC have argued against INEC’s power or authority as a regulatory body, to make determinations and enforce same. How could that be? What would be the use of a regulatory body without authority, power and exercise of reasonable discretions? What would be the use of a referee or an umpire that does not possess the authority, power and reasonable discretions to officiate and control a game, a match or tournament? Why have a referee or an umpire at all, in the first place?

Only oxymoronically gifted persons that could have argued or continue to insist, that a regulatory body such as INEC, should not have the authority, powers and reasonable discretion to examine, analyze, screen, to determine the qualifications and suitability of candidates for elections. INEC should and does have the authority to qualify and disqualify candidates; Or, INEC, as a regulatory body, would have be rendered useless!

Nigerians who are tired of those who pillage and plunder Nigeria should celebrate this groundbreaking judgment of the Appeals Court! In essence, the court has added one more weapon and one more ammunition to the war against corruption. This Appeal Court judgment has established, in our body of laws, that we will all be held to account for our actions. It is as if to say to all Nigerians, there are consequences for corruption and sundry misconducts! You want to be corrupt? You will be barred from public office!

The Nigeria we want after all, is a Nigeria where there are rewards and punishments for actions and indulgences. Where we are all held to account. This is therefore a victory for accountability, transparency and good governance!

These are the sorts of foundations, systems and structures that will enable Nigeria become a better society for Nigerians’ common good. Those who are corrupt now will have, a multiplicities of public agencies to contend with as citizens, and more particularly so, if and when, such citizens engage in politicking and seeks elective and appointive public office.

Now perhaps, Nigerians citizens, especially public officials, would become more circumspect and reflective or deliberative in their actions and conducts. Now perhaps, Nigerians would be more careful not to affront and violate all laws and in particular, laws that are enforced by EFCC, ICPC, Federal Internal Revenue Service, FIRS, and other relevant agencies, because, eventually, the government, political opponents or a third party, or a public spirited citizen, might just squeal on a wrongdoer, inform INEC and zap their political ambitions! The fear of INEC, may soon become the beginning of political survival wisdom! It is all coming together for Nigeria and for good! Nigeria’s greatness begins!

This is an epochal and momentous legal decision! This is a landmark judgment, this is a giant milestone in Nigeria’s democratic development and I applaud our Appeals Court!

“Once the candidate has been established to be in breach of a condition precedent delineated in the 1999 Constitution.”

“A lead judgment written by the President of the appellate court, Justice Umaru Abdullahi, but delivered by Justice Rabiu Danlami Muhammad, following the absence of the former held that: "For the avoidance of any doubt, having regard to the clear provisions of the 1999 Constitution and the Electoral Act, it is my considered view that the appellant (INEC) has the power and authority not only to screen any candidate sent to it by political parties, but to also remove the name of any candidate that failed to meet the criteria set out by the Constitution without having to go to court."

“In reaching the conclusion that INEC has the power to disqualify candidates, it reviewed the relevant provisions of the law and the Constitution. The reviewed provisions are Section 137 (1) of the Constitution and Section 32 of the Electoral Act.”

“Justice Abdullahi declared: "The law on interpretation of the statute is settled that where the words of a statute are clear and unambiguous, they should be given their ordinary grammatical meanings, unless it will result in ambiguity or absurdity.”

"Not only are the words of Section 137of the Constitution clear and unambiguous, it is common ground that it provides for disqualification of a candidate aspiring to the office of the President or Vice President.”

"What is in contention is whether the appellant, the body charged with the power to organize, undertake, and supervise all elections to the office of President, Vice President, etc. as well as carry out such other functions as may be conferred upon it by an Act of the National Assembly pursuance of paragraph 15 of the third Schedule can ensure the observance of the provisions of Section 137 (10) of the Constitution?”

"It is the view of the learned senior counsel for appellant (Gadzama) that it could. There is merit in his submission since the maker of the Constitution would not make these provisions for the fun of it.”

"I am of the firm view that if the appellant decided to close its eyes to the infraction of the provisions of the Constitution, it would be tantamount to abandoning the heavy responsibility placed on it by the provisions of the Constitution to wit: Organise, undertake and supervise the conduct of a credible election”

Robot  Villager

# 1 The verdict is in! A referee can officiate? An umpire can control a tournament? I would have thou...Read the full article. Posted by Robot| 04.04.2007 14:14

aiksmart  Villager

# 2 Hi Paul, You, Ndibe, and co are a bunch of prolific writers, I wonder were you all steal the time to do this writeups from. I haven`t read this one though, however am amazed by the volumes that you all command. Best Regards Ike Posted by aiksmart| 04.04.2007 15:39

Auspicious  Villager

# 3 =aiksmart;165923>Hi Paul, You, Ndibe, and co are a bunch of prolific writers, I wonder were you all steal the time to do this writeups from. I haven`t read this one though, however am amazed by the volumes that you all command. Best Regards Ike Hehe! This NVS sef.. No, Aiksmart hasn't read it.. But he admires a prolific writer in Paul. Who cares if all Paul wrote is Hogwash(!) "You, Ndibe and Co.", says Aiksmart. As he's "amazed" by size of their work.. Wow, what a compliment! Auspicious. Posted by Auspicious| 05.04.2007 00:20

ikechukwu  Villager

# 4 “Once the candidate has been established to be in breach of a condition precedent delineated in the 1999 Constitution.” Paul, I quoted this because that is the onus of the jugdement of the Appael Court. The appeal court ruled that if a candidate has been established to be in breach of the constitutional provision then INEC has the power to disqualify him. I will not go into the right or wrong of the jugdement, as of now the law is that INEC can disqualify if there is a breach of the constitution by the candidate. The second question Paul is that what breach of the constitution did Atiku commit. Please dont let us confuse issues, the jugdement was very clear and unambiguous. INEC said Atiku was indicted by an administrative panel of inquiry, so based on that Atiku is constitutionally barred. However, on tuesday, the federal high court in its ruling said the indictment has already been quashed by a court ruling so it does not exist in law, on that basis Atiku was never indicted. As we speak today there was never an indictment on ATiku. So the question I keep on asking is now in light of the court jugdement , on what ground now is Atiku being barred from contesting. There is no confusion here, Appeal court said INEC can disqualify once the candidate is constitutionally ineligible, so any lower court ruling to the contrary is disregarded. The high court said the ground in which INEC based its disqualification on Atiku does not exist in law. NOW WHY IS HE BEING DISQUALIFIED. Mind you the Appeal court did not say INEC can just wake up and disqualify candidates for any reason other than that based on the constitution. There is no confusion here at all. Posted by ikechukwu| 05.04.2007 03:42

THE VOICE  Villager

# 5 Really, there is no confusion. I don't understand why Nigerian press are trying to create confusion where there is none. Is it a case of mischief or not what? The President of NBA has done well to enlighten and educate on the misinformation . It is clear like in a football match , INEC has the power to red card any offending player but can not dictate which player a team can field for a match. Posted by THE VOICE| 06.04.2007 09:31

I Love Nigeria  Villager

# 6 INEC: No Way For Atiku, Ngige Kalu Escapes Legal Hurdle FROM MOHAMMED ABUBAKAR (ABUJA) Except for one case, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) yesterday maintained that no candidate indicted by the Federal Government's white paper would be allowed to contest the general elections, which begin on Saturday, April 14. According to INEC, the only exemption to the rule is the Abia State Governor and presidential candidate of the Progressive People's Alliance (PPA), Chief Orji Uzor Kalu. It said Kalu was being given the consideration because the court ruling that he should be listed for the presidential election came before the deadline for the substitution of candidates by the political parties. INEC's National Commissioner for Information and publicity, Mr. Philip Umeadi (jnr) said yesterday that the commission's stance was in line with the provision of the 1999 Constitution and Electoral Act 2006. He said: "We have never deviated from the provision of the constitution, we shall implement the recommendations in the white paper. This is not personal, but we must follow the rules if this election must hold." Umeadi said INEC only made an allowance for candidates who took the commission to court and "we are challenging them. So far, those whose names appeared before the expiration and substitution of the nomination have nothing to worry about. But, we cannot do otherwise if anybody appeared after the expiration of the nomination and substitution." With this INEC's position, Vice President Atiku Abubakar and Action Congress (AC) Governorship candidate for Anambra State, Dr. Chris Ngige, who secured favourable judgement after the commission's deadline may not feature in the race. But a source close to the Vice President said yesterday that INEC's statement was a clear evidence that the organisation was acting above the law. But he noted: "No one individual, no matter how strong or powerful is above the justice system of this country. "The judicial powers of the state are vested in the courts; they are not vested in the executive or, in this case, in the INEC. Unless INEC is operating Mugabe's Constitution, they shall be bound by law. "We shall go back to the courts and the courts know how best they can impose their decision. impose Prior to Umeadi's declaration yesterday, he had told journalists that INEC would meet on Thursday night to discuss the Appeal Court and Federal High Court, Abuja separate rulings on Atiku. But The Guardian learnt that the commission did not pay attention to the Vice President's case during the meeting. The commission reportedly failed to revisit Atiku's case because of the Appeal Court verdict, which says that it has the power to screen and disqualify candidates for any elections. INEC was believed to have discussed some state Resident Electoral Commissioners (RECs) whose activities have of recent been subjected to public criticisms Of note was Deacon Martins Okunfolami, who reportedly went to privately visit the Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Chief Tony Anenih and the REC of Ondo State, Barrister Josiah Uwazuronye who the Labour Party accused of conducting activities in favour of the PDP administration in the State. Umeadi was optimistic that the elections would be hitch-free, because all logistics and materials were in place. He confirmed that the commission would appeal against the court injunction restraining it from disqualifying Kalu and other candidates. Posted by I Love Nigeria| 07.04.2007 09:21

I Love Nigeria  Villager

# 7 From: myat_baby@yahoo.com To: Lawcareer2007@aol.com Cc: Bcc: Subject: What say you now? Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 3:14 AM Mr. or Dr. know-all, so what happens now to your very warped, hypocritical and illogical arguments (at Gamji.com) that INEC was right in disqualifying candidates? What say you now? You should always look before you leap. At least you could have waited for the Supreme Court. Are the Supreme Court Justices stupid or political, like you? What an utterly lame article you wrote!!! Posted by I Love Nigeria| 17.04.2007 13:31