25% in FCT as an express requirement of the constitution is unique and different from other grounds of the presidential election petition

The PEPC began sitting on the various petitions arising from the 2023 presidential election on the 8th instant with the pre-hearing stage of some of the petitions. The constitution allows the court a maximum period of 180 days from the date the petition is filed to give judgement one way or the other on the petitions before it. The bone of contention now is whether it is appropriate to SWEAR-IN AND INAUGURATE the person returned as elected by INEC. The constitution holds that the person can be sworn in regardless of the petitions against him. This is to ensure that a VACUUM is not created in the leadership of the country. This would have been avoided if the constitution stipulated that all petitions must be dispensed with before the effluxion of the tenure of the outgoing president. This is what obtains in most other jurisdictions. The grounds for challenge of an election result through a petition are spelt out but none of them is EXPLICIT IN TERMS OF SUBJECT AND OBJECT EXCEPT ONE. That is the requirement of the declared winner to obtain 25% of the votes casted in FCT in addition to having majority of the votes and scoring at least 25% in a minimum of two-thirds of the states of the federation, which in our case is 24 states.

The Court should make a ruling going forward on whether INEC interpretations of that provision is RIGHT OR WRONG because if the president-elect is sworn in and the Court later rules that the constitutional threshold was not met, it would lead to a CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS which cannot be ameliorated. WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO ACTIONS TAKEN BY SUCH A PRESIDENT WHO WAS SWORN -IN IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS. When the Vice Presidential Candidate of the LP, Mr Datti Ahmed raised this issue, it was seen as a RED-HERRING ostensibly because he was an interested party and whatever he said was viewed in a subjective mode. But there is sense in what he was saying if only we analyze the message and not the messenger. Instead of harkening to the fine points he raised, what I see are threats of bodily harm to him. He is being threatened with TREASON, TREASONABLE FELONY AND OTHER CRIMES by some political hirelings. These propagandists failed to state the law which he violated to warrant the intimidation and harassment meted to him. The Nigerian Constitution provides for FREE SPEECH AND FREEDOM TO HOLD AN OPINION. The Nigerian minister who spoke so loosely on this in the US should know better than he did rather than ridiculing Nigeria. Nobody has bothered to ask how Mr Datti Ahmed’s pronouncements are treasonous. Can an offense against a president-elect be treasonous or treasonable? What law said so? The funny thing is that those who are raising this hoopla are people who are steeped in the law.

I believe that the court can isolate the issue of 25% requirement in FCT and make a RULING ON IT GOING FORWARD TO AVOID A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS to confirm whether or not it is mandatory. It can then treat other grounds of petitions within the time frame. Some people may ask why it was not so with previous petitions? The answer is simple; 25% requirement in FCT was never an issue in previous presidential election petitions. This is akin to a matter before a court where the issue of JURISDICTION IS RAISED. The Supreme Court has advised lower Courts to dispense with the issue of jurisdiction first, before hearing the main matter because it would be foolhardy for a court to waste its precious time on a matter in a matter for which it has no jurisdiction. There is nothing SACROSANCT ABOUT MAY 29TH after all the handover date used to be October 1ST. THAT DATE IS NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION BUT THE 25% RULE FOR THE FCT IS IN THE CONSTITUTION, THEREFORE IT IS SUPERIOR. The question is does the constitution make a provision for a situation like this where the tenure of an incumbent expires and there is no elected person to take over from him or her? The constitution did allow for the Senate President, then the Chief Justice of Nigeria during which time the judiciary is expected to dispense with the petitions. The Supreme Court in a judgement delivered in 2005 said that the scoring of 25% of the votes cast in FCT is mandatory for any presidential candidate to be declared the winner of the presidential election. It is therefore incumbent on the PEPC to rule on whether this apply in the instant case or not.

I read the invocation by the respected SAN, Mr Falana that some of colleagues in legal profession are engaging in red herring by suggesting that petitions in the presidential election can be concluded before the Swearing in date of May, 29th. I respectfully wish to disagree with the respected SAN because what the constitution allows is a maximum of 180 days for the PEPC to deliver its judgement. It is not mandatory for the court to exhaust the 180 days. It is possible for the court to deliver its judgement in far less than 180 days say in 10days. For example, if the court can rule that a winner must score at least 25% of the votes cast in FCT then, the candidate declared winner by INEC should not be sworn in on the 29 May because he did not meet this important threshold. We must learn to respect our constitution because it is the basis on which all powers and authority of federation are exercised. The court should consider the proprietary and constitutionality of swearing in a person who has not met an express requirement of the constitution. That will amount to a coup d’etat against the constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria. We have a choice between defending our Constitution and spinning, gaslighting and propaganda. As for me and my orbit, we shall defend and respect our constitution. The mother hen says that the reason she hollers when the kite snatches her chicks is for the world to hear her voice not that she was capable of retrieving her chicks from the kite. Therefore, the reason for this writeup is for the records. Those who have ears let them hear.

Godson O. Moneke, a quantity surveyor, economist, sociologist, administrator and sociopolitical advocate wrote from Abuja.