I do not envy the people of Sokoto State at all. Before their very eyes, the powerful turned the hand of their electoral clock backwards. They voted on March 9 for a governor but got what Abuja called ‘inconclusive’ as their dividend of democracy. Their gubernatorial baby was half way out of the womb and suddenly the midwife closed the maternity ward and declared the delivery inconclusive. That precisely was what the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) did, when it refused to declare the clear winner of the governorship election.
It is a very precarious situation. An umpire who desires peace would do justice to all parties before him. And you cannot be said to have done justice to parties unless you use the law as the law says you should. If northern Nigeria is volatile, it is partly because it values justice. But when certain other places in the North boil over, Sokoto always maintains its peaceful essence. Will it remain calm and an oasis of peace with this open assault on the patience of the people? INEC’s chairman, Mahmoud Yakubu is a professor of history. He cannot be alien to the historical impacts justice has always had on peace. The last few days have witnessed a frenzy of tension and anxiety brought about by the curious decision of INEC to declare governorship elections inconclusive in six key states, five of them in the North. The most shocking of the decisions is about Sokoto, the seat of the caliphate.
Contesting this election with the APC should not have become the classical storytelling contest between the lion and the hunter. It should not be that until the lion of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) has its own storyteller – (its own INEC) – the All Progressives Congress’ (APC) hunter will always have the best stories. The opposition should not be contesting against a combination of the ruling party and INEC. The incumbent governor, Aminu Waziri Tambuwal who is flying the flag of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) faced the fire of that election and came out tops. Indeed, before the election process was halted last week, Tambuwal was leading. He had 489,558 votes and was closely followed by the candidate of the APC who polled 486,090. Then the midwife, INEC, decided to abort the baby when it was already on its way to life. It declared the election inconclusive citing cancellation of votes in 136 polling units across the state, the total of which, it said, exceeded the margin of win. Its defence was the Electoral Act.
You do not claim to be an impartial judge and hold down one contestant for the other. An election was held in Sokoto according to the law, a winner emerged as defined by law, then the process was halted or aborted – almost exactly as the military did with the June 12 election. And what does the constitution say about winning a governorship election? Section 179(2) says: “A candidate for an election to the office of Governor of a State shall be deemed to have been duly elected where, there being two or more candidates – (a) he has the highest number of votes cast at the election; and (b) he has not less than one-quarter of all the votes cast in each of at least two-thirds of all the local government areas in the State.”
The truth, backed by facts, is that Tambuwal not only has the highest number of votes cast in the election as demanded by Section 179 (2) (a) of the constitution, he has also fulfilled the constitutional requirements as provided by section 179 (2) (b) by having up to 25 percent of the votes in 2/3 of the local government areas in Sokoto State. Indeed, his votes spread across all local government areas of the state. The election umpire is hiding behind other subsidiary legislations, notably the Electoral Act and its guidelines for the 2019 elections to tip the scale against manifest justice. But it is trite that the constitution cannot be subject to the powers of the Electoral Act or of any other subsidiary law. The tail does not wag the dog.
Building a skyscraper of electoral excuses on the provisions of Acts and regulations is like encouraging the Okro plant to grow taller than the farmer. It cannot work and will not end well. The Electoral Act draws its life blood from the constitution. The Act can, therefore, not override its parent on all matters. That inviolable parent-child relationship also, is the law: Section 1 (3) of the 1999 constitution (as amended) says that “If any other law is inconsistent with the provisions of this Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail, and that other law shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void.” As far as the constitution is concerned, a winner has emerged in the last governorship election in Sokoto State. That person is Tambuwal.
If INEC’s refusal to declare Tambuwal as the winner is a ploy to cure the APC of its defeat with a repeat match, then it is too late. Ignoring the constitution and cuddling a subsidiary legislation to elect an unpopular state chief executive is dangerous for our electoral system. It will create for INEC the image of a dictator, a King Herod who was troubled and therefore had “all Jerusalem (troubled) with him.”
A rerun or supplementary election as being suggested by INEC will be an unjust act designed to overreach the leading candidate and confer undue opportunity on others for a rematch after they have been roundly beaten. I call on INEC to follow strictly what the constitution says on this matter. INEC should do the needful, conclude the process, declare the winner and save the seat of the Caliphate from a needless war.
Abdulsalam writes in from Abuja
and then