Abati, Osun governorship poll and the supreme court verdict

BY SEMIU OKANLAWON

Reuben Abati is a household name, at least for those literate enough to consume media contents of the print and television channels. And I respect him. He has a rich profile as a writer and columnist of note; rising to stardom as member and later Chairman, Editorial Board of one of Nigeria’s most thriving newspapers, The Guardian; one time spokesman of a Nigerian former president; founder of a blog, www.reubenabati.com.ng and a regular anchor on one of the most watched television channels in Africa, Arise. With a First Class degree in Theatre, holding a doctorate degree, Abati simply should be one of the most brilliant minds around.

Just as many of us, as school boys, ‘worshipped’ the writings of notable Nigerian writers and columnists such Alaba Ogunsanwo, Tola Adeniyi (Abba Saheed), Bisi Onabanjo (Ayekooto), Alade Odunewu (AllahDe) and even much more contemporary ones like Ray Ekpu, Dare Babarinsa, Onome Osifo-Whiskey and that generation of opinion molders, it is obvious that some Nigerian young minds aiming at careers in journalism and writing may have come under the ‘spell’ of their supposed model; savouring his ideas the way kids savour and devour noodle meals.

It is not unlikely that within the academic community as well, some budding researchers in stylistics, writings, communications, dramatic arts and other related knowledge fields may have been making his works subjects of their dissertations. Such are some of the additions that fame can bring.

The dossier above has necessitated this piece as a response to Abati’s article with the title Osun, Supreme Court And The Violent Senator.

In the said piece, Abati had tried frantically to discredit the judgment of the Supreme Court on the Osun governorship poll which declared that Gboyega Oyetola of the All Progressive Congress was indeed the winner of that election. In summary, he posited that the Supreme Court judges were wrong to have relied on technicalities of the law and also said that the verdict runs contrary to what the common man on the streets expected.

This must be made clear at this juncture. Abati’s piece could not have been an unbiased, fair representation of the facts as they are on the Osun governorship poll and the attendant legal wrestling that followed. And lest his audience believe the article was one of the numerous interventions on issues of national importance, we must remind them that Abati, far from being a commentator, detached from the emotions and sentiments of partisanship, wrote his piece to protect the interests (wrong or right) of the political party he to which he belongs.

Those who may have forgotten should be reminded that the author of this article in question contested election in Ogun State in 2019 as the running mate to the governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, Buruji Kashamu. He is not an uninterested party.

Now to his bone of contention! The Osun 2018 governorship election has come and gone including the litigations up to the apex court in the land. Expectedly, the outcome of the litigation certainly will continue to be at the centre of political and legal discussions for some time to come.

The Supreme Court, on Friday July 5th, 2019 laid to rest all the issues in controversy regarding the said election and affirmed Oyetola of the All Progressive Congress as the Governor of the State.

The Supreme Court of Nigeria is the apex court in the land, thus placing it in a vantage position to do and undo. Its finality is much more embedded in Justice Oputa’s dictum in the celebrated case of ADEGOKE MOTORS LTD. V. ADESANYA & ANOR thus ‘’It is not part of jurisdiction or duties of this court to go on looking for imaginary conflicts. We are final not because we are infallible; rather we are infallible because we are final.’’

The finality of the Supreme Court also enjoys constitutional provision. Thus it is the last bus stop for all appeals. Judges of the Supreme Court are human beings capable of erring, since ‘’to err is human.’’ I, however, hold the view that it has demonstrated unusual courage in matters before it. The court’s decision on Rivers and Zamfara states’ congresses, which were nullified are still fresh culminating in victories for the opposition Peoples Democratic Party in those states.

In those instances cited above, when the PDP and their allies threw lavish parties and regaled in their ‘deserved’ victories, the Supreme Court did well! Now that the apex court affirmed the position of the Court of Appeal on Osun’s case, name-calling, skepticism as well as implied casting of aspersions on the character and integrity of those judges may not be ruled out. What hypocrisy!

It is needless to state that the apex court in adjudicating upon cases before it, has demonstrated an unusual candour and courage to take the best decisions regardless of whose ox is gored. This has attracted commendations and condemnations from political gladiators depending on their sentiments. It is imperative that the court would not act in vacuum in deciding cases but based on established legal and judicial principles.

Responding to Supreme Court’s verdict on Osun governorship election, he had argued that the judgment was based much more on technicality as same was hinged on the absence of Justice Obiorah at the February 6 sitting of the election tribunal, which made the Court of Appeal and the Apex court to nullify the majority decision of the tribunal delivered by Justice Obiora J.

Wendel Holmes had stated that ‘’life of law is not logic but experience.’’ It is the latter that culminate in sacrosanct doctrine of stare decisis which urges courts not to depart from principles earlier laid down by them. This ensures consistency of principles of law, which is sine qua non to a formidable legal system.

The law has been settled by the apex court in KALEJAIYE v. LPDC which is to the effect that where a member of a judicial tribunal did not participate in a trial and thereafter gives a decision in the matter, the decision is nothing but a nullity. That was why Wole Olanipekun SAN, in his submission at the Court of Appeal equated Justice Obiora’s act to judicial hearsay which has no place in our law.

I am of the opinion that informed legal opinions even have much more jurisprudential authorities to back this than the case of KALEJAIYE V. LPDC.

It is convenient for this writer to amplify alleged intimidations during the rerun election which were never proved but ignore the fact that the PDP candidate could not indeed have come near the votes he scored in the main election had there been credible voting in Ede South, Ede North, Egbedore where the PDP and its candidate and allies perfected their electoral malfeasance. I invite Dr. Abati to place side-by-side the number of polling units where the rerun took place and those in the three local government areas where APC loyalists were locked indoors to avert the bloodshed they had been promised if they ever voted against a “son of the soil?”

Abati further raised in his piece, that the apex court did not consider some issues before it. The answer is simple. It is a well-established principle of Appellate Practice that a single issue, well-formulated, germane, successfully argued and considered by an Appellate Court such as the Supreme Court of Nigeria can dispose off an appeal.

As disciples of the Realist School of Jurisprudence that believe in nothing but what the law courts say as law, we need not reiterate that the law as it stands today is what the apex court says in the Osun governorship election tussle. The Supreme Court has power to overrule itself when opportunities present themselves. Until then, the court’s verdict on the 2018 Osun election dispute is not only the extant position of the law but a precedent to be followed by the court when cases that are on all fours with the Osun case come before it. Kindly perish the thought that the positions of the dissenting judges both at the Appeal and the Supreme courts would end up being much more useful to justice and humanity than the majority decisions.

There is a complex case of self-contradiction if Dr. Abati in one breath argued that “It is not the duty of judges to rely on public sentiments for determining cases” and in the same breath queries “What does the ordinary man think?” If, using his own words, “it seems to me that the ordinary man in this case considers the ruling of the Supreme Court, an anti-climax,” Dr. Abati appears to have arrogated the right to think for the common man to himself.

If justice is to be served based only on the opinions and emotions of the common man, the cases in Zamfara and Rivers would most probably have gone in favour of the APC.

Let it be said that in spite of the generally widespread knowledge of Nigeria that the elite claim, we must never conclude we fully understand the real, critical issues that determine and sway the psyche of the common man when he is taking decisions such as those he takes when holding ballot papers at polling stations.

The point is this: The ordinary man in Osun, in their huge majority with some card-carrying PDP loyalists, would queue behind a Gboyega Oyetola instead and not an Ademola Adeleke. Forget about someone’s dancing steps. That’s not an issue. There are many other critical considerations that set apart these two personalities and those factors are there for all right-thinking people to see especially when it comes to the serious issues of governance.

I conclude by stating that every other argument over this matter amounts to mere linguistic gymnastics aimed at some political intrigues. Let Dr. Abati save himself the trouble of compelling the discerning segment of his readers and followers to question the rationales behind his writings on issues of national relevance. My humble advice!

*Semiu Okanlawon, journalist, Communication and Strategy Consultant was Special Adviser, Information and Strategy in Osun and writes via [email protected]