Ever since the Supreme Court upheld the election of Chief Nyesom Wike as the governor of Rivers State on January 27, many political watchers have been held in stitches, not so much because the apex court’s verdict runs against the popular grain of public expectation, but more because it rubbished the perceived wisdom of both the Election Tribunal and the Appeal Court which had ruled that Wike was not validly elected.

Many had thus waited for the promised justification of its verdict which was released penultimate Friday. Some political watchers worry over the practice of giving a verdict and waiting for another two weeks to explain the grounds of the verdict. Why do the reasons for the verdict not accompany the verdict simultaneously?

The impression it suggests is that the apex court is in a hurry to dish out its verdict and takes its time to later look for how to justify what it had ruled on.  That, in a way, vitiates the convictions behind the judgement.
It is instructive that all the governorship appeals that went to the Supreme Court were upheld in favour of the sitting governors. The cases and dynamics of the allegations are varied. But the Supreme Court, as if in no mood to cause any political upset, upheld the elections of all the sitting governors. And being the Supreme Court, the judgements marked the end of legal agitations on such matters.
However, the faux pas confessions in the case of Rivers State is giving verve to the widely-held suspicion that not all the judgements from the apex court were indeed products of superior logic. There is indeed the suspicion that there was more to the verdict than meets the eye.

If all else is discounted, it is difficult to ignore the recent confessions of Governor Wike during a thanksgiving service to celebrate his victory at the Supreme Court. While speaking during the church service, the role played by his new godfather, former Governor Peter Odili, slipped off his lips.

Hear him:

“Let me thank our former governor, Dr. Peter Odili (whose wife, Mary Odili, is a Supreme Court Justice). He will call me midnight to tell me what to do….he will say ‘go so so place.’ I took all his advice, and here we are today.”
Students of logic will decode the “mystery” of the Supreme Court verdict on the 37-word confession of Gov Wike. In other words, following the step-by-step guide and advice of Odili, victory was achieved (if not acquired) hence the thanksgiving.

It makes even more sense when the fact that Odili’s wife, Justice Mary Odili, is in the Supreme Court. It is even more insightful to know that the Odilis, somehow, have managed to get away with whatever they want from the Nigerian judiciary. Till date, Odili secured a perpetual injunction forbidding any organ or agency of government from arresting or questioning him on any issue including his governorship of Rivers State for eight years. Awkward as the injunction is, it has managed to remain unvacated courtesy of the deep reach of the Odilis in the judicial courtyard of Nigeria.

The Odilis have been politically opposed to the political camp of former Governor Rotimi Amaechi and his All Progressive Congress (APC), and has therefore sided strongly with Gov Wike and the PDP.
So the question is asked: where and where did Odili send Wike? What was the message in those errands? What was the essence or import of those messages? What was the content of all the advice Odili gave Wike? Why was Odili always waiting for midnight when normal people should be sleeping before calling Wike? Is it so that nobody will hear even the telephone conversation between them at such an ungodly hour? Is it not logical to conclude that because Odili sent Wike to certain places and people, he landed the victory being celebrated?

It is not enough to dismiss these worries as mere political shenanigan.
The judiciary is the sacred sanctuary of societal order and democracy. A threat to its sanctity is a recipe for social disorder and chaos. That is why the judiciary must be insulated from the wild and contagious effect of partisan politics. Like Ceaser’s wife, Judges must be seen to be living above board.
Worried about the “innocent confessions” of Wike, the APC governorship candidate in Rivers State, Dr Dakuku Peterside, who had earlier accepted the Supreme Court ruling, albeit choicelessly, soon called a press conference to query the apex court’s verdict, asserting that  ““It is therefore obvious that the decision of the Supreme Court on the Rivers State Election was not a product of justice but rather a product of compromise and orchestrated contrivance to legalise electoral violence and rigging and, in turn, reward injustice. This calls for serious introspection by our Judiciary and judicial officers.”
Dakuku believes the judgement was procured especially as, according to him, Wike and his supporters were already in a jubilant mood several hours before the apex court gave its ruling, implying that Wike was already privy to the judgement before it was read.
He argued further that

“Despite my acceptance and temperate public comments on the verdict of the Supreme Court on the 27th of January, 2016 Governor Nyesom Wike, by his unguarded utterance last Sunday, seems to give credence to the pervading doubt being expressed on the judgment in public space especially in the media. Many a Nigerian continue to wonder why PDP and Governor Wike’s supporters went on wild celebration across Rivers State as early as 9am on the Day of Judgment, even when the actual verdict was handed down at about 6:20pm of that day.

“It clearly suggests that they might have been in the know of what the judgment would be long before the Supreme Court pronounced it. This is coupled with several comments especially on the social media some three weeks earlier such as ‘Thank God there will now be no need for a rerun election… It is surely ending at the Supreme Court.”
I have always argued that unlike science, law  thrives on the power of casuistry.

And I recall how lucidly, then Chief of General Staff. Lt Gen Oladipo Diya put it during one of the NBA lectures at the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs in the mid 90’s. Diya had lampooned judges and their judgements when he said too often, judges have two sets of opposing judgments in either sides of their pockets and depending on which side of the parties pays better, a judgement is pulled out and read out with an almost equal convincing argument and justification, as the unread judgement. Such is law! Whatever their lordships decide is arguably defendable in the eye of the law, especially among learned persons.

Speaking on the Supreme Court ruling, it is difficult to be convinced about the logic of the apex court. It seems to have predicated all of its argument on the card reader which it said was an innovation not a legislation, and therefore cannot be a basis for voiding an election.
Even if that tepid logic is upheld, what about the scale of violence that characterized the Rivers governorship election?
Yes, the Supreme court judges may not depend on media reports, but were they not part of the society? Were they in Ghana when the election took place? Did they not hear of the brigandage that defined the election? Did they not see footages of attacks, killings and destructions?

Pray, both the army, voters, police and many others served as witnesses to the violence and disorder that characterized the Rivers election. Police stations were used as voting centres. Pictures don’t lie. Those videos are still there in the webs. Many people were maimed. Many people were killed.

There were TV documentaries on the killings. Local and international election observers described Rivers as a mass of killing field, based on what they saw. Violence was animated. The governor literally marched through blood to step into Brick House.  But our learned Lords, like Gradgrind in Charles Dickens’ Hard Times, are in search of hard facts. Even when the facts are provided, they trivialized them.

In their wisdom, they discountenanced all the evidences provided at the two lower courts and held on to the technical tail of a large monster to arrive at their verdict.

It is Okay to dismiss all that took place as political expletives, but it must not be forgotten that many children were turned orphans, as women were turned widows, in this governorship project.
Human lives have been subordinated to the banal board of legalese.
Yes, Supreme Court has spoken. And it cannot be challenged. But the Supreme Being shall yet speak.

What the Supreme Court has inadvertently  achieved by this ruling is that the end justifies the means. In other words, any desperate politician keen on grabbing power can just employ any means to grab power and use the quixotic legal framework to ratify it later.

Put differently, politicians are encouraged to be desperate, disregard the rules and just grab power first, and all other things shall follow. I dare say this is a dangerous twist in our journey to establishing a stronger democratic culture.
INEC was right in introducing the card readers. It indeed contained electoral malpractice. But to reduce its overriding relevance to banal argument of legislation, is a drawback to democratic pursuits in the country.

I however hope the National Assembly, will by this ruling, quickly begin the amendment of the Electoral Act to accommodate the Card readers. Until then, the arguments of the Supreme Court will remain like wonky logic or judicial magic.

Thisday……..

This page has been viewed 515 times