The Judiciary’s Redemptive Role in Nigeria’s Democracy

An independent judiciary is universally acknowledged as one of the most defining and definitive features of a functional democracy. Many, in fact, see it as an essential bulwark against abuse of power, authoritarianism and arbitrariness. How it functions as well as how the various stakeholders in a democratic experiment appropriate its interventions and role in the polity are critical indicators of the health or otherwise of a democracy. There seems to be nowhere in the world presently where this reality is more apt as it is in Nigeria, one of the world’s largest democracies with a population of over 140 million people. Big thanks to the judiciary, the last hope of the common man, democracy in Nigeria is taking a strong foothold. Most recently, it recorded a major triumph when the Supreme Court gave a momentous judgement where it affirmed that the gubernatorial candidate voted for by the electorates in the oil rich Rivers State in the Niger Delta region during the last general elections was Hon. Rotimi Amaechi, former Speaker of the State House of Assembly and not Sir Celestine Omehia. It further directed that Amaechi “be sworn in immediately”. After many decades of ruinous, and by many accounts the most rapacious military rule in modern history, Nigeria witnessed a transition to civil rule in 1999, which many, though, argued was well stage managed to favour the overbearing interests of the retreating military establishment given that it resulted in the emergence of Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, himself a former military dictator, as the new president via an electoral process that had all the trappings of a high level military maneuverings. Thus began in earnest Nigeria’s third attempt in full blown constitutional democratic experiment following the botched experiences of 1966 and 1983, all by the military. However, with a combination of an agitated local populace, that has also become evidently disenchanted and disillusioned with military rule, as well as an international system that seems more predisposed to the spread, institutionalization and nurturing of democratic values across the world following the collapse of communism, Nigeria’s latest attempt at democratic rule was one condemned, as it seems, to endure and grow by any means necessary. However, of the three arms of government in post military rule Nigeria, the one that looked more “institutionalized” to carry the tottering weight of the other two, almost made incapable by years of military rule, is the judiciary. Though, it too had been a victim of the systemic and systematic abuse orchestrated by the military in the Nigerian polity. This however did not vitiate the fact that as at 1999, the judiciary, as weakened and disenabled as it was, had more capacity to function in the emerging democratic Nigeria. Though many commentators and analysts on Nigeria since 1999 have had to express an almost unanimous view that the actions, posturings and predilections of not a few Nigerian political office holder have been everything but democratic, there was also an overwhelming optimism in some quarters that democracy being a process and journey and not necessarily a destination, its continued experimentation would likely result to some semblance of perfection and orderliness. But, as optimistic as many have been, Nigerian politicians seem more distinct for their peculiar enthusiasm to subvert known democratic principles and values. The greatest evidence of such reality was the events witnessed at the last General Elections conducted in April 2007. The 2007 Nigerian General Elections was remarkable in more ways than one for the country: One, it would mark the first civilian to civilian transition in Nigeria’s chequered political history if successful; two, there were widespread fears that the country could implode if the elections were inconclusive and deadlocked leading to threat to peace and security not just in the West African sub region but the African continent in general given that one out of every five Africans is a Nigerian. As events, however, turned out, the elections were widely reported by both local and foreign observers as the most fraudulent and flawed in Nigeria’s electoral history, a consequence of which was the demand by the opposition and civil society for its outright cancellation. The tell-tale signs for such fraud were all too evident: a partisan electoral body that was as ill-prepared as it was widely regarded of lacking independence, being tied to the apron strings of a vicious executive arm and the ruling party; a corrupt political class that was as desperate for raw power and its associated perks than anything else as it was disingenuous in perverting electoral rules; political party structures that did not offer fairness and justice equally to members just as they lacked inbuilt capacity to manage intra party conflicting interests; and a compromised electoral system that favoured the rich and strong as against the poor and weak with impunity. All these resulted eventually in such acts as illegal and unconstitutional substitution of candidates at will by the powers that be at all levels of governance across, flagrant disregards of rules as well as brazen acts of illegalities by government agencies such as the anti-graft agencies like the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, Independent Corrupt Practices Commission, ICPC, and the Police, overtly sympathetic to the party in power at the centre, Peoples Democratic Party, PDP. These agencies brazenly determined which candidate to disqualify or allow to contest elections even when they had crossed their various party hurdles. As it were, the expectations of many a Nigerian were that the only institution well primed and positioned to save the Nigerian political class from committing a Hara-kiri that could endanger the democratic experiment was the judiciary. Expectedly, this is what the judiciary has just being doing especially since after the last 2007 General Elections. The first judicial intervention post 2007 elections was the judgement on Anambra State where the shambolic election of Andy Uba, a well known acolyte of the former president, Olusegun Obasanjo, was nullified on the ground that there was no need for an election ab initio given that the tenure of Peter Obi, who was sworn in as governor in 2006 after a protracted legal battle to claim his mandate from Chris Ngige had not exhausted his four tenure as at the time was held. With that judgement, ended what many averred was the greatest rape on democracy in Nigeria where an individual was practically assured of electoral mandate even before vote was cast. The judiciary has variously played redemptive role in Nigeria’s democracy through declaration of landmark judgements that tended to put aright the many undoings and undemocratic actions of Nigerian politicians as well as go along way in reassuring the citizens of the prospects and sustainability of democracy in the country. So far, beside the nullification of the election of Celestine Omehia in Rivers State by the apex court, election petition tribunals across the country have set aside the election of two governors in Kogi and Kebbi states on the premise that the electoral body, INEC unconstitutionally and illegally barred the opposing candidates from contesting the elections. In canceling the election in the two states, the judiciary displayed steely courage, wisdom and fair play. Earlier, it had through the Supreme Court declared as illegal and invalid the substitution and replacement of Senator Ifeanyi Ararume as the governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party in Imo state with Chief Charles Ugwu. There are fears that if the fore going is anything to go by, by the time the election petition tribunals wound up activities nationwide, many governors would lose their illegally acquired seats. Against this backdrop, there is a spreading feeling of ecstasy by Nigerians that the judiciary is assuming its position as the bastion of democracy in the country, the absence of which would have created a room for the continued reign of tyranny of the strong, rich and mighty. At no time in Nigeria’s political history are citizens optimism and belief in democracy so high as now because the judiciary seems awakened to its role to among others checkmate the arbitrariness of politicians, highhandedness of those in power and the illegalities and brazenness of a few privileged individuals.