Follow Us on Google
Ken Nwobodo
In a matter of days, the 9th Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria would be inaugurated. An exercise of such magnitude and symbolism in a democracy evokes joy both for the individual legislators and members of their constituencies.
But for the good people of Imo West senatorial district, there is no joy, not even a whimper of mirth. And that’s because they would have no senator representing them in the hallowed red chamber. The election that would have produced their senator turned gruesomely violent. There were cases of ballot-snatching, raw and ruthless brandishing of the most dangerous weapons.
Those of us who witnessed the show of brute force erroneously tagged election are still at a loss why the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, did not summarily cancel the election. The event of Saturday, February 23, 2019 with particular reference to the Senatorial election was a huge joke and a parody of logic and commonsense. It is both worrisome and disturbing that after the testimony of the Returning Officer, Prof. Innocent Izuchukwu Ibeawuchi of the Federal University of Technology, Owerri, that he was manhandled and forced to declare the result by then Governor Rochas Okorocha and his collaborators under duress and extreme life-threatening circumstance, INEC has failed to invoke the relevant aspects of the Electoral Act to put a closure to the senatorial election.
May I remind INEC that the video of what happened to Prof Ibeawuchi and other adjunct officers including the electorate who participated in the election has trended and it is already rife in the public space. It is therefore inconceivable that despite such overwhelming manifestation of violence targeted at installing Okorocha winner against the popular will and wishes of the people, INEC would still stay hedgy in doing the right thing; to wit, nullify the election which result was declared under duress.
This writer commended INEC when it cancelled some results in Lagos, Rivers and Bauchi on account of violence. It is apposite and proper that the same measure of redemption be applied in Imo West where electoral violence was egregiously manifest in the course of the senatorial election. What is sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander. That’s fairness, nothing more!
For the avoidance of doubt, Section 129 (4) of the Electoral Act states, “Any person who snatches or destroys any election material commits an offence and is liable on conviction to 24 months imprisonment.”
The Act further states that anyone who directly or indirectly engages in electoral violence shall be liable to three years in prison or a fine of N1 million.
If INEC considers that what happened during Imo West senatorial election did not offend this section of the Electoral Act, what about Section 131 (1) which states: “A person who – Threatening directly or indirectly, by himself or by another person on his behalf, makes use of or threatens to make use of any force, violence or restrain; (b) inflicts or threatens to inflict by himself or by any other person, any minor or serious injury, damage, harm or loss on or against a person in order to induce or compel that person to vote or refrain from voting, or on account of such person having voted or refrained from voting; or
(c) by abduction, duress, or a fraudulent device or contrivance, impedes or prevents the free use of the vote by a voter or thereby compels, induces, or prevails on a voter to give or refrain from giving his vote, (d) by preventing any political aspirants from free use of the media, designated vehicles, mobilisation of political support and campaign at an election, commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine of N1,000,000 or imprisonment for a term of three years.”
The above section of the Electoral Act best captures what transpired before, during and after the senatorial election. It was an open show of shame. Men in uniform and other arms-bearing recruits hijacked what was supposed to be a civil process shorn of brigandage and savagery. The shocked electorate were intimidated by the maximum and brutal display of force by agents of a sitting governor. Those who mustered the courage to challenge the barbarians were hushed up, some beaten while others were openly humiliated by the brutes with their weapons of destruction. Such parody of election should not be allowed to stand. The conduct of some security personnel in the case of Imo West senatorial election is far from complimentary. It mirrors the unprofessional conduct of some security men in Rivers State which prompted INEC to cancel the Rivers election and order a re-run in some areas.
The people of Imo West senatorial district deserves similar treatment from INEC. The same manner INEC reviewed elections in Rivers, Lagos and others states and nullified the elections in some places on account of the perfidious and vicious conduct of some politicians and their agents, it should review the Imo West election. It amounts to a mockery of democracy. It diminishes the pristine values of democracy which include the freedom of the people to freely elect their leaders without interference. The Imo West senatorial election failed to uphold these values.
The electoral umpire has been resolute, insisting it will not issue Certificate of Return to Okorocha whose agents upstaged the election and compelled the Returning Officer to declare the then governor winner. INEC is right. Recognising Okorocha as winner is an endorsement of electoral violence and abuse of electoral process. It means that tomorrow any contestant can procure victory by abducting, coercing and forcing the Returning Officer in his or her election to declare him or her winner. If we reduce election to such charade, then we have done irreparable damage to democracy. INEC must stand its ground.
Those who cite the law, that INEC has no power to withhold the certificate of return once the result has been declared miss the point. You cannot quote such section of the Electoral Act in isolation.
Nwobodo writes from Orlu, Imo State
