Justices of the Court of Appeal and other judicial officers involved in the various election tribunals that decided petitions resulting from the 2023 general elections have advocated that election disputes should be concluded before any winner of an election assumes office.
They also suggested that all pre and post election disputes should terminate at the Court of Appeal.
The judicial officers also suggested that the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism be applied in dealing with pre-election matters.
They also suggested an amendment to the Constitution to ensure that the nullification of the candidate of a deputy governorship candidate did not affect the candidacy of the governorship candidate.
These and more formed the resolution of participants at the two-workshop held between May 20 and 21 in Abuja by the Court of Appeal for the review of the 2023 election petition tribunals/court and appeals.
The suggestions were contained in a communique issued at the end of the workshop, which was released on Wednesday evening.
Part of the communique reads: “The workshop resolves that: *The constitution should be amended to provide that all pre and post-election matters shall be heard and determined before the winners of the election take the oath of office.
*Section 187 of the 1999 Constitution should be amended to include a new sub-section stating clearly that the disqualification or non-qualification of a Deputy Governor shall not affect the Governor-elect or governorship candidate of a political party.
*Section 246 (3) of the extant constitution is proposed to be altered to reflect the finality of decisions of the Court of Appeal in all election appeals, governorship appeals inclusive.
*All pre-election appeals should terminate at the Court of Appeal.
*Paragraph 25 (2) of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act that deals with Quorum be incorporated into Section 285 of the Constitution of the FRN 1999 (as amended) to read as follows: If the Chairman of the tribunal or the presiding justice of the court who begins the hearing of an election petition is disabled by illness or otherwise, the hearing may be recommended and concluded by another
Chairman of the tribunal or presiding justice of the court appointed by the appropriate authority.
*Section 285(7) & (12) of the Constitution should be amended to state as follows:
Sub-section 7 should read: “An appeal from a decision of an election tribunal or Court of Appeal in all election matters shall be heard and disposed of within 60 days from the date an appeal is entered in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court,” and “not when judgment is delivered.”
Sub-section 12 should read: “An appeal from a decision of a court in a pre-election matter shall be heard and disposed of within 60 days from the date an appeal is entered in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court,” and “not when notice of appeal is filed.”
They resolved that the state of the law on transmission of results must be revisited and reviewed to avoid the kind of controversy surrounding the transmission of results in the 2023 elections.
The judicial officers also suggested that the law should be amended to create an exception where a subpoenaed witness can still give evidence so long as the fact supporting his evidence or testimony is captured in the petition at the time of filing.
They called for the deletion of Section 137 of the Electoral Act, 2022 which deals with burden and standard of proof should be from the Act because it has not dislodged or displaced the burden and standard of proof enacted in sections 131-136 of the Evidence Act.
The judicial officers asked that Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) be introduced into our Electoral Laws particularly now that the Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023 has been passed by the Legislature.
“It is suggested that pre-election matters should be encouraged to be mediated upon through ADR by the court.
“The number of Justices of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal should be increased to make justice accessible to the Nigerian people.
“The negative publicity in which the Judiciary is portrayed in bad light by the social media and other forces associated with it should be countered by a robust communications/media department to be established by the respective courts.
‘In conclusion, the Judiciary performed its constitutional role as an impartial arbiter and protector of the rule of law and will continue to do so in our nation’s journey and quest to build a truly democratic society.”
Judges recommend conclusion of election cases before winners assume offices
