Court orders INEC to issue certificate of return to Okorocha 

The Federal High Court, Abuja, on Friday ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to immediately issue certificate of return to the immediate past governor of Imo State, Rochas Okorocha.

The court also ordered the electoral body to publish Okorocha’s name in its list of winners of the 2019 National Assembly election, having been declared winner of the Imo West Senatorial District election held on February 23, 2019.

Justice Abang gave the order while delivering judgment in the suit filed by Okorocha challenging the refusal of INEC to issue him with certificate of return, having won the senatorial seat with the majority lawful votes cast at the election.

According to the court, INEC lacks the lawful authority to withhold the certificate of return to Okorocha.

Okorocha was declared winner of the senatorial election but his name was omitted in the INEC list of winners of the said election.

The electoral umpire further refused to issue him with certificate of return on the grounds that the Returning Officer for the election claimed he was forced to announce Okorocha as the winner.

Okorocha, therefore, approached the court to compel INEC to issue him with certificate of return, having been declared winner by the electoral body’s Returning Officer for the election.

In his judgment, Justice Okon Abang declared that INEC’s unilateral decision to withhold Okorocha’s certificate of return is unlawful, ultra vires, null and void.

Justice Abang insisted that INEC’s decision, which had no legal justification, could not be allowed to stand so as not to create problems for the polity.

According to Justice Abang, if the electoral body’s action is condoned, election can easily be cancelled on mere claims of acting under duress by Returning Officers.

“INEC has no lawful authority under the Electoral Act or Constitution to withhold certificate of return. It is unlawful. No law supports the unilateral decision of INEC. Assuming that its Returning Officer claimed that he made the declaration under duress, INEC cannot be the prosecutor and judge in its own case,” he held.

Justice Abang noted that INEC had taken sides in a matter it ought to be an umpire and ought not to act beyond the declaration of the results.

He further held that if the defendants in the suit were aggrieved about the outcome of the election, they were at liberty to approach the tribunal which would avail them the opportunity to ventilate their grievances and call witnesses to prove their claim that the Returning Officer announced the result under duress.

Besides, Abang stated that INEC could have withheld the certificate of return if it had declared the election inconclusive or if there was a rerun.

He held that by claiming that the Returning Officer announced the result under duress, INEC breached the right to fair hearing of the plaintiff as he was not allowed to tell his own side of the story, adding that INEC didn’t even consider police report before the unilateral decision.

Abang accordingly slammed a cost of N200,000 against INEC and N100,000 each against the seven other defendants in favour of Okorocha.

Earlier, Justice Abang dismissed the preliminary objection filed by INEC and six other defendants against the jurisdiction of the court to hear the suit on claims that the suit filed by Okorocha was a post-election matter which ought to be filed at the National Assembly Election Petition Tribunal in Owerri, Imo State.

He stated that although the refusal of INEC to issue Okorocha with a certificate of return relates to a post-election dispute, the question raised by the plaintiff and the reliefs sought bordered on the administrative decision of INEC, which is within the purview of the Federal High Court.

Abang specifically held that the jurisdiction of election petition tribunal is limited to whether a person was duly elected or validly returned, adding that the tribunal cannot be saddled with mundane things such as the administrative decision of INEC.

The INEC, however, expressed regret over the judgment.

• INEC lacks power to reverse my election ― Okorocha

INEC in a statement issued to newsmen and signed by its National Commissioner & Chairman, Information and Voter Education Committee, Festus Okoye alluded to the judgment that it fell short of the Commission’s  expectations.

“As a law-abiding institution, the Commission will continue to obey judgements of all courts of competent jurisdiction.

“However, the Commission’s overriding consideration is the safety of its ad-hoc staff, Electoral Officers and Collation/Returning Officers and is worried that if electoral impunity is allowed to flourish, any individual can harass, intimidate and put the Commission’s officers under duress, procure a favourable declaration and be rewarded with a Certificate of Return.”

Okoye, however, promised that “the Commission will meet as soon as practicable to do the needful.”

“Refusal to issue certificate of return is not one of the four grounds to go to the tribunal. The core mandate of the tribunal is whether a person is validly elected or returned,” he said.

He further stated that by the statutory provisions of the tribunal, the plaintiff, who is declared winner of the senatorial election cannot go to the tribunal as a petitioner.

He said the grievances of the plaintiff cannot be addressed by the tribunal as there are no legal provisions for the tribunal to entertain matters relating to the administrative decision of INEC.

Abang consequently held that the court had jurisdiction to hear the suit, saying, “It is not a post-election dispute that can be filed at the tribunal. No section of the law establishing the tribunal allows the plaintiff to go to the tribunal as petitioner.

“Plaintiff cannot go to the tribunal to challenge an election he won,” Justice Abang stated.