Buhari versus Atiku and the anti-climax

As the public debate continues over the judgment of the Supreme Court on the last presidential election, KUNLE ODEREMI examines the general import of the judgment.

THE nation awaits details of the grounds upon which the Supreme Court of Nigeria upheld the election of President Muhammadu Buhari that the opposition candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, had sought to upturn.

The judgment was generally received with an uneasy calm across the country, even though weeks before the judgment, the parties had traded accusations and counter-accusations as October 30, 2019 approached.

The altercations were over insinuations that the Justices of the Supreme Court were under pressure to compromise on the matter before them.

Whereas the authorities of the apex court had to make clarifications and denied being ‘caged’ in its assignment, both the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the All Progressives Congress (APC) still went at each other’s jugular up to the threshold of the judgment delivered on Wednesday by the seven-man team of Justices, presided over by the Chief Justice of the Federation, Justice Tanko Muhammad.

To some experts, the judgment did come as a surprise because of what has seemingly become a traditiion in Nigeria’s jurisprudence on presidential matters. Such experts cite the case that involved the late President Shehu Shagari and the sage, Chief Obafemi Awolowo in the Second Republic.

In spite of the contentious issue of twelve-two thirds of 19 states that make up the country in 1979, the Supreme Court gave legitimacy to the election of Shagari.

Till date, the matter remains thematic in political discourse on Nigeria. Not even similar titanic battle since Nigeria returned to civil rule in May 1999 has overshadowed the Shagari/Awolowo contest at the Supreme Court.

Of course, Chief Olu Falae put up a good fight against the election of Chief Olusegun Obasanjo in 1999, the first time such a keen contest was between two kinsmen.

There was a paradigm shift in subsequent elections, with the combatants coming from the North in 2003, 2007 and 2011 and 2015. In most of the contests, incumbent President Buhari gradually became the face of the opposition. Until 2015, the opposition failed in all its protests that went as far as the Supreme Court in the quest to ‘secure’ justice over the outcome of presidential elections.

Reps summon Customs, CBN, 5 others over alleged concession scam

Conversely, the unanimous judgment of the Tanko Muhammad-led panel on the Buhari/Atiku eover the outcome of the 2019 poll was a rude shock because of perceived ‘strong’ grounds of appeal by the aggrieved PDP candidate and his party. They had hoped that the apex court would grant the request of Atiku that he be declared the winner of the last presidential election or at worse that the poll be conducted afresh.

The optimism of the Atiku-PDP sympathisers was anchored on what they considered as the flagrant refusal of the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal to look at the merit of the grounds that the PDP candidate based his case.

These include the controversy over the academic qualification of Buhari, the question that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had a server for the purpose of conducting the election, contrary to the claim by the commission.

Coupled with this was the claim by the loyalists of Atiku and PDP faithful that the petitioner had a deluge of documentary evidence to buttress its allegations of gross impunity, abuse and malpractice during the election.

Atiku and his party had jointly filed their appeal before the apex court to challenge the September 11, 2019 judgment of the Justice Mohammed Garba-led Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal.

The tribunal’s judgment which Atiku and his party were dissatisfied with, had dismissed their petition challenging the outcome of the February 23, 2019 poll. Subsequently, the petitioners, on September 23, 2019, filed 66 grounds of appeal before the Supreme Court to challenge the judgment of the tribunal.

They prayed the apex court to nullify Buhari’s victory and either order that Atiku be declared as the valid winner of the poll or order the Independent National Electoral Commission to conduct a fresh presidential election.

With the Supreme Court judgment, the matter has returned to the public space, not just for the purpose of analysis and critique, but also for the immediate and far-reaching import for the nation’s electoral system, calls for more holistic reforms and democratic practice in general.

Opinions remained varied on the inherent gains and implications of the judgment.

While some commentators, politicians and other stakeholders opine that it has further enriched the evolving democratic culture and value in the country, others believe it is a sad commentary. The latter are of the view that there was more than met the eye in the judgment.

In fact, some claim it is akin to the saying: the hand of Esua and the voice of Jacob. But another group of observers are of the opinion that there can never be a consensus on such a major electoral battle, given the plural nature of the society. It is their contention that even though in politics, like in every other contests, there must be a winner and at the same a loser, oftentimes, disputes arising over an electoral battles act as the fluid that oils the machinery of politics.

In their separate views on the judgment, most of the major political actors in the country have displayed variegated dispositions, though with a few sounding reconciliatory in their comments.

For example, a former lawmaker representing Bayelsa East in the upper legislative chamber, Senator Ben Murray-Bruce, welcomed the Supreme Court’s ruling that dismissed the appeals filed by the candidate of his party,  Atiku. But he tasked the president on the grinding poverty in the land.

On his Twitter page, Murray-Bruce wrote: “The Supreme Court has spoken and as the highest court in the land, we cannot but accept its verdict. I congratulate President Buhari and ask attention also be focused on healing the nation.

There will be a contest in 2023, but now we need to grow the economy and eradicate poverty.”

On his part, Timi Frank, who is a strident critic of Buhari, said the judgment was instructive about the challenges confronting the country.

According to Frank, “It is not all about Atiku Abubakar; he cannot go hungry.It is about the future of young Nigerians.

If Nigerians will continue to sit back and refuse to fight for their rights, the obvious hunger, poverty, insecurity, unemployment, incompetence hands in government and all other problems facing the country will not voluntarily disappear.”

Similarly, the PDP vice-presidential candidate,  Mr Peter Obi, in an interview with journalists after  Wednesday’s proceedings, said: “This election and the judgment are not about President Buhari, or His Excellency, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar.

They are about the future of our country and what we are going to bequeath to our country.”

However, such view was countered by the Minister of State for Labour, Festus Keyamo. He said the judgment was more or less a fait accompli. “Congratulations Nigeria! All the lies and deceit have come to a crushing halt. About seven months ago, I said the substance of the petition was the most useless I have ever seen. Now, we have been vindicated. Henceforth, the opposition need to raise its game and be more constructive,” he wrote on his twitter handle.

The CJN had while delivering the judgment stated:  “We have examined all the briefs and the exhibits for over two weeks and we agree that there is no merit in this appeal. The appeal is dismissed.  (Our) Reasons to be given on a date to be announced.”

For Buhari, it is yet another moment to savour the aura and aroma of victory. But he waved an olive branch to Atiku and his party for partnership in the interest of the country. According to a  statement by  his Senior Special Assistant (Media and Publicity), Garba Shehu, Buhari said: “This matter (Atiku’s case) is now closed…the opposition, as much as the government, must now move on; and without the need for further distractions.”

The reaction of Atiku to the judgment underscored the importance of the rule of law in a democracy. Therefore, he concluded: “I must accept that the judicial route I chose to take, as a democrat, has come to a conclusion. Whether justice was done, is left to the Nigerian people to decide. As a democrat, I fought a good fight for the Nigerian people. I will keep on fighting for Nigeria and for democracy and also for justice.”

Also reacting, the Leader of the APC, Senator Bola Tinubu described Buhari’s victory as well-deserved. In a statement, Tinubu urged the PDP and Atiku to now concentrate the energy and intellect deployed in the whole battle toward joining APC “to move this nation more rapidly and assuredly forward.”

Other APC stalwarts also said it was time for the nation to forward. For instance, the APC national publicity secretary, Lanre Issa-Onilu, in a statement in Abuja, hailed the judiciary

He stated: “The party hails the judiciary for standing firm in the face of the PDP and Atiku’s subterfuge and for siding with the Nigerian electorate who through their votes decided to do away with the PDP’s ignominious past and re-elect the President Buhari-led APC administration, which has ushered in a new era of progressive growth for our country.

“With the ruling of the Supreme Court, which has finally affirmed President Buhari’s election victory, we enjoin the PDP and Atiku to jettison their destructive and disruptive agenda against Nigeria, which they have made up their minds to pursue for the next four years.”

The Speaker of the House of Representatives, Honourable Femi Gbajabiamila, described  Buhari’s victory at the Supreme Court as a victory for democracy, adding, “I want to urge Mr Atiku Abubakar, who has put to the test our justice delivery system by contesting the election result from the lowest to the highest court, and the PDP to accept the judgment in good faith and in the spirit of sportsmanship and help the government in building a strong, prosperous and united Nigeria.”

With the Supreme Court having decided on the Buhari/Atiku matter, what form of political alignment should Nigerians envisage in the months ahead? Are the APC and the PDP likely to witness a restructuring that could have serious implications for the few of the other parties with considerable presence in the National Assembly and other structures of government?

Nigerian Tribune