Conflicting judgements, our impediment, says INEC

…Says it inhibits smooth functioning of the Commission

…Acting CJN asks judges to handle election petitions without influence

Tunde Opalana, Abuja

The Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, has expressed concern on issue of conflicting judgments arising from pre-election and post-election cases as impediment to the smooth functioning of the Commission. Yakubu said that conflicting judgments, especially by courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction at the High Court level, are putting the Commission in a very difficult position and creating uncertainty in the process. Represented by National Commissioner, Mrs. May Abamuche Mbu, at a two-day workshop organised for justices and judges to be engaged in election petitions after the 2019 polls held Monday at the National Judicial Institute, Abuja, he said there is urgent need by the judiciary to avoid conflicting judgments. “Conflicting court orders are negatively affecting the consistency, neutrality, and public perception, not only of the Commission, but the Judiciary as well. “There is therefore the urgent need to address the issue of conflicting judgments in order to engender certainty in the electoral process. “Our second area of concern relates to the lack of consequential Orders by the Courts after making findings on an issue and stating the position. “In such cases, the Commission is compelled to take a position relying on previous decisions of the Court on the subject. “This as in some cases made the Commission appear inconsistent and has also led to protracted litigation.’’ Yakubu said that the workshop was important as it would afford INEC a platform to further record its concerns about the adjudication of electoral disputes as the country approach the 2019 General Elections. Declaring the workshop open, the acting Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Muhammed Tanko, urged judges to handle election petitions without any external pressure or influence either by political parties, stakeholders or economic interest groups. Tanko, represented by the President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Zainab Bulkachuwa, said that it was important that the judiciary must maintain absolute independence. “Judges should handle election petitions without any external pressure or influence either by political parties, stakeholders or economic interest groups. “The Judiciary must continue to take steps to ensure that it is not seen as being partisan but must always demonstrate manifest integrity in its adjudicatory processes. “Consequently, Judicial Officers serving on election petition tribunals, must note that Judgments must not be ambiguous and should be devoid of any form of external influence. “Your Lordships should shun unnecessary associations with lawyers who may be acting as conduits for politicians no matter how innocent they may be portrayed. “You must guard your integrity and the integrity of the Judiciary, by avoiding acts that will bring you under the disciplinary jurisdiction of the National Judicial Council (NJC). “The NJC will not hesitate to wield the big stick sanctions to any judicial officer who is found wanting in the discharge his duties,’’ he said. Tanko said that the judiciary must not be drawn into black-hole of political expediency as Judges were not willing tools to be exploited by the whims and caprices of Politicians. He urged Justices and Judges to refrain from granting frivolous injunctions, remain impartial and most importantly, shun any form of inducement while carrying out their mandates. He promised that the Judiciary “will continue to do its best to ensure Judicial Officers remain conversant with the provisions of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended), and other relevant laws towards ensuring efficiency and uniformity in the quality of judicial decisions.’’