Within a week whatever is left of the reputation of INEC chairman, Dr Abel Guobadia, collapsed in complete tatters. Two major events accounted for the diminished credentials of Guobadia. The first major blow to the handling and management of the 2003 general elections was struck by the Appeal Court which delivered judgement on the petition brought before it by General Muhammedu Buhari, the ANPP flag bearer against President Olusegun Obasanjo, the PDP winner of the presidential election.
On Monday December 21, the Appeal Court, in a split judgement of three to one struck out the petition of Buhari, as not sufficient to void the election of Obasanjo as president. At a surface level it looks like the electoral process was sound, but the devil is in the details. The four Justices held to a variety of degrees that there were electoral fraud in at least 14 states, the only difference is that while Justices Umaru Abdullahi, Muhmud Muhammad and Francis Tabai, held that what was discovered was not sufficient to void the election, Justice Sylvester Nsofor, who read the minority opinion thought that the fraud was of the dimension that warranted the voiding of the election, to use his word 'the poll was a farce'.
The position of the justices could therefore be nothing, but cold comfort for Guobadia. The final straw for the INEC chairman was the unanimous condemnation of the election in Ogun state, the President’s home state, where the justices thundered: "All allegations in Ogun state were criminal in nature. They ranged from violence, finger printing, official intimidation, bias and falsification of results." So far with this verdict nobody had heard a word of regret from Guobadia, or his commissioners who in decent climes would by now have resigned their positions, and are facing possible criminal charges of a grave kind.
Taking it further, Justice Umaru in a particular instance noted with anger the refusal by INEC to obey the court orders to produce a certified true copy of the election results, he said of this: "The refusal to comply with court orders is condemned by me as reckless. It does not appear to me to be the approach to an issue by a body which claims to be an independent body."
Heavy words, except in the last instance, Justice Umaru, ought to have brought the full weight of the powers of the court to bear in compelling INEC to obey the court. INEC being a creation of the law have no locus to flout the court order. In any case immediately after the election in 2003 when many election monitors and observers, and the aggrieved condemned the election as being fraudulent, the mantra by INEC was that anybody who was not happy with the election should go to court. Now a year after the same INEC asked to produce important decouments before a court refuses!
With all these blows raining down on INEC, Guobadia has carried on as if the commission he led had just been given a clean bill of health. Barely 48 hours after the Appeal Court had turned in a damming verdict on the 2003 polls, Chief Christian Uba, the self acclaimed godfather of Anambra politics called a news conference to confess that the polls in Anambra was rigged in favour of Governor Chris Ngige, he went further to say that he has original copies of certificates of return. As everyone knows Uba’s role in enthroning Ngige is of the sort that can never be underestimated. But what is of importance here is that a pattern of abuse and manipulation of the election were so widespread and on a massive level, that no matter how much anyone like to hedge, the managers of the election ought not to remain in office a day after the court judgement; and clearly with respect to the confession of Uba, a further indictment of the electoral body.
This writer finds of particular interest and believes the observation by Justice Nsofor on the issue of INEC and certified true copies of the results has a correlation with Uba and his claims of having certificate of return. Nsofor, says of INEC and its obduracy on this issue as indicative that the election was fraudulent and as such deserves to be voided, adding : " Had INEC obeyed the court order, the statement of results would have conclusively shown as alleged by the petitioners that the scores of the candidates were assigned. So I hold that the petition on this ground alone succeeded and rendered the entire election by INEC on April 19th 2003 no election. Consequently, the election stands annulled."
If the tongue lashing by the Appeal court was not enough the Uba press statement further confirms what has been known for sometime, but this time a lot more dramatic than would have generally been expected. " Again, Dr Chris Ngige admitted before Chief Audu Ogbeh that he did not win the election, when I asked him the same question. Because he was more attentive than the President, I told him that even the certificate of return of the governorship was in my custody and at the appropriate time, I will make the copies available to the press."
From the examples cited an emerging pattern shows the large scale fraud of the election, and raises disturbing signals for the future. For a start the electoral system is primitive and corrupt, and over due for reforms. But even as this is important, the content of the human material is actually the key. In other words it is no use reforming a system when those who are going to run the system are by themselves not fit for the position they are occupying or may likely occupy.
In the extant case, Dr Guobadia and his team cannot and should not be allowed to remain in office if they decline the most honourable gesture of resigning from their positions. Imagine an INEC under Guobadia organising another election in 2007! What kind of process would that be, would people have confidence in such a system? Will it be credible and acceptable to the people and the politicians? One of the saddest aspect of the Nigerian political system, which is why it is possible for Guobadia, Obasanjo and others of their ilk to remain in public office is the high ignorance of a large percentage of the Nigerian people about politics.
The whole world today knows that the republic of Ukraine is having another election because the incumbent tampered with the process, and the people found it intolerable and therefore unacceptable, leading to the voiding of the polls by that country’s Supreme Court.
The point is that if the people of Ukraine had not risen and stood together on this issue, the incumbent government would have returned to power on the basis of electoral fraud. Yet, at the heart of democracy for those who care is the issue of legitimacy; without it those in office would feel no sense of accountability and the people would only tolerate the government, and could find every possible reason to oppose the policies of government as the last one year has shown. So, if Nigerians are unable to show the right type of political behaviour that puts their leaders in check, why is it then difficult for those in position unwilling to demonstrate proper decorum and civilised behaviour? In this case what justifiable reason does the government have in keeping Guobadia in office, other than that the man has to be rewarded for the 'good work' done! Is the President who himself has a great deal of moral burden to contend found his will paralysized by the events of the last one week to ask the INEC chairman to resign, if Guobadia lacks the decency and self respect to do so himself.
This talk about reforms may well be a waste of time if the actors of this fraudulent system remain to implement the new thrust. I mean why should they act in any different manner if there is no sanction against them. But where they are made examples of, the system adjusts and people know that there is a new dawn.
But can a mortally damaged President find the moral authority to demand of a high functionary of state his resignation letter, when for all the people know, the actions of the latter could be in line with a secret agenda. INEC can take all the bashing, but there is unwritten guarantee of protection from the law. If this is the attitude, then the only weapon available is public opinion. In this case a resolute demand by the people that pending when the reform process is finally built up, Guobadia should go. He has not shown by his conduct that he is a fit and proper person to hold such a high and sensitive office as election umpire. In fact, the way things stand today, the kindest judgement of history on the election of 2003, under Guobadia is that it was disaster.
In the final analysis it is difficult to improve on the umbrage heaped on Guobadia and Obasanjo over the conduct of the election by Prof. Itse Sagay, who said: "Obasanjo has enjoyed a little legal victory, but has suffered a devastating moral defeat. To say that the whole of Ogun state election was rigged and therefore unacceptable is evident of a wider malpractice, which both international and local observers had condemned is a serious indictment of this so called PDP government victory.
In Anambra state President Obasanjo thought he was talking about Gov. Chris Ngige, but forgot that the person who did that for Ngige could have done also for him, Obasanjo. So, if you look at the whole thing it is a complete farce. I was amused the other day to learn that the Chairman of INEC, Dr Abel Guobadia, had gone to Ghana to observe the election there, which was adjudged by all the observers, both local and international as world standard, the type of election that are held in Europe, where standards are very high, was what Ghana was able to organise. I am embarrassed that Ghana a small country can organise an European standard election, and is therefore better developed than Nigeria politically. Guobadia should be ashamed of himself, because the election he organised was a sham, a disgrace, and seriously I think that the INEC chairman should resign his position."
