By Zainab Suleiman Okino and John Nwokocha, Abuja
Th e Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), yesterday, asked the Federal High Court, Abuja, to set aside an earlier order of the court, suspending the recall of an APC lawmaker, Dino Melaye, representing Kogi West Senatorial District, from the Senate. INEC commenced Melaye’s recall following the receipt of a petition from members of his constituency demanding that he be recalled. Melaye, however, approached the court, seeking an order stopping INEC from going ahead with the process; pending the determination of a suit he fi led to challenge his recall. In the suit, he had alleged irregularities and fraud in the petition.
In the application which was argued by his lawyer, Mike Ozekhome, SAN, he submitted that the signatories in the petition were fake, fi ctitious and concocted. Th e lawmaker claimed some of the signatures were of dead members of his constituency. In his ruling, Justice John Tsoho, ordered parties to maintain status quo, pending the determination of the matter, and adjourned further hearing till September 29. However, INEC applied that the matter be heard before a vacation judge. When the matter came up yesterday, counsel to INEC, Sulayman Ibrahim informed the court of an application seeking to set aside the ex-parte order made by the court on July 6, to maintain the status quo.
He also informed the court of another application, seeking accelerated hearing of the matter during vacation. In an affi davit deposed to by one Paave Demenongo, the commission said it was not heard before the ex-parte order was made. It also said since it received the order on July 10, it had been unable to take action on the recall process, notwithstanding the fact that time was of essence in carrying out its duties. “Th e defendant/applicant has 90 days from June 21 to conduct referendum in line with the approved time table and schedule of activities for the recall of the senator representing Kogi West Senatorial District of Kogi.
“Th e period of 90 days will elapse on September 18.” In the another application seeking accelerated hearing, INEC said it was predicated on the grounds that it was its constitutional duty as provided by Section 69 of the 1999 Constitution. However, counsel to Melaye, Nkem Okoro, opposed both applications, stating that he was served on July 18, less than two days before the hearing. He argued that by the rules of the court, he needed seven days within which to respond to both applications. Th e judge, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba, adjourned the matter till July 27, for hearing. Group defends INEC In a related development, contrary to insinuations over the cause of the stalemate on the lawmaker’s recall, INEC may not have halted the process which began following a petition signed by 52 per cent of registered voters in Kogi West Senatorial District. Addressing the media in Abuja yesterday, a coalition of Civil Society Organisations, Independent Service Delivery Monitoring Group (ISDMG), blamed the turn of events in the process on politicians who initiated the recall and the Judiciary whose pronouncement stopped INEC from further actions on the recall process. Executive Director of ISDMG, Dr Chima Amadi, expressed displeasure over attempts to assassinate the character of Professor Mahmood Yakubu, as well as rubbish the integrity of the Commission under its current chairman by desperate politicians and judicial pronouncements. CSOs said: “Certainly, the INEC didn’t initiate the recall process, Senator Dino Melaye’s constituents did, tagging INEC and engaging in character assassination of its chairman through the innuendo contained in recent media reports is irresponsible and the height of cowardice.
“Th e same class of politicians that initiated the senator’s recall process that compelled INEC to commence its duties is the same that are using judicial processes to thwart it.” Continuing, it said: “In a fresh court action, the Kogi state APC has sued INEC to stop the Melaye recall. Although the case is yet to be heard… it is clear that politicians and the courts are standing in the way of INEC’s discharge of its constitutional responsibilities. How then does a warped mind begin to allege that this process is being truncated due to INEC chair caving in to blackmail?”
Th e CSOs also described matters arising from the recall process of Melaye as “unfortunate and an attempt the ridicule the credibility of INEC” as impartial and unbiased election management body by politicians and the judiciary for selfi sh reasons. INEC had stated its readiness to commence the process of verifi cation of signatures of Melaye’s constituents after the petition signed by 52% of registered voters’ from the zone from July 19, before the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, asked that all parties should return to status quo ante and until the determination of the case slated for September 29 during which time the 90- day time frame established by the Constitution for the recall process would have lapsed.
Concerned by the court order and its implication for the discharge of its constitutional duties, INEC embarked on wide consultations, including drawing the attention of the Chief Justice of the Federation to the matter, and by weighing all options before arriving at the decision to suspend the recall process in obedience to the court order. Th e group also stated that the Melaye recall process should continue and assured of its readiness to monitor the process, stressing that this is to ensure fairness and in compliance with the rule of law.
Th e rights group, therefore, expressed confi dence in the credibility of the Yakubu-led INEC, to conduct free and fair elections based on the result of all elections so far conducted by the commission under his watch. It would be recalled that an online news platform had reported that INEC abandoned Melaye’s recall because of the Senate’s decision to probe activities of TETFund, where the INEC boss served as Executive Secretary, between 2007 and 2011. INEC has since debunked the allegation through a press statement in which it described the said report as “a fi gment of the author’s imaginations.” Rather, it said, it was obeying “order of the court which the Senator had approached to halt his recall process.”
