Opinion

The Oracle: Are INEC Resident Commissioners Homeless Bats? (Pt. 1)

Published

2 years ago

September 24, 2022

Eric

By Mike Ozekhome

INTRODUCTION

I watched and listened very carefully to my good friend, Chief Festus Okoye, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)’s cerebral Commissioner for Information and Voter Education, on his recent television interviews on Channel and AIT stations. I completely disagree with his take and analysis of the place and space of the Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC) in the organogram and scheme of things concerning the electoral process in Nigeria. His analysis, which literally dismissed the RECs with a wave of the hand in a most cavalier manner, if swallowed hook, line and sinker, has the dangerous effect of not only completely defanging RECs and rendering their electoral efforts at the State grassroots levels completely useless, but also of creating avoidable turmoil and schism within INEC itself, as one homogeneous and independent family unit. It can also have the unintended serious consequence of self-immolation which can self-destruct. It amounts, in my humble view, to saying that the RECs who are constitutionally created across the 36 states of Nigeria, simultaneously and indeed under the same sections with INEC Chairman and the 12 National Commissioners that Okoye harped on, are no more than mere appendages to INEC Commission headquarters, and therefore toothless bulldogs and amoebic bats that neither belong to the animal kingdom, nor to the birds kingdom.

It appears to me there is a deliberate and sustained effort by INEC Headquarters to diminish RECs powers and clip their wings, for reason best known to it. If RECs’ monitoring and conduct of elections at state level levels can be whimsically and capriciously discarded because, according to Okoye, they are mere delegates of the national body of INEC Commission that comprises only of the Chairman and 12 members, then one must ask why the Constitution created them at all in the first place. Can the human anatomical body be whole simply by having a head and stomach alone, without the brain, limbs, eyes, teeth, ears, tongue and nose? I think not. How come, if we were to follow Okoye’s argument to its logical conclusion, that a mere witlow suffered by a person on his tiny thumb ,keeps the person’s entire body in pains, agony, pangs and sleeplessness throughout the night?

SOME LEGAL ANALYSIS

Section 153 (1) (f) of the 1999 Constitution as amended provides for the establishment of certain federal bodies, which includes INEC.

By virtue of section 153 (2) thereof, the “composition” and powers of the bodies established in section 153 (1) above (which includes INEC), are as contained in part 1 of the 3rd Schedule to the Constitution.

Now, Paragraph 14 (1) of the said 3^rd Schedule clearly provides that:

“INEC shall comprise the following members –

(a) Chairman, who shall be the Chief Electoral Commissioner;

(b) Twelve other members to be known as National Electoral Commissioners …”.

However, the same paragraph 14, but under subsection (3), immediately provides for the establishment of the office of the Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC) “for each state of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja”. There are 36 states of Nigeria by virtue of section 2(3) of the Constitution. Without these states, there is no sovereign entity by the name “Nigeria”. The criteria for appointing the Chairman, 12 Electoral Commissioners and the REC is that they must be non-partisan a person of unquestionable integrity. But while the age of the Chairman and the 12 National Commissioners is fixed at 40 and 35 years respectively, that of the RECs is fixed at 35. Being constitutional creatures, the Chairman, 12 National Commissioners and RECs all enjoy the same statutory protection, recognition and respectability. None has powers to undermine or ignore the other.

WHO THEN IS A MEMBER OF INEC COMMISSION

The answer as regards membership of INEC the Commission can be found in section 153 (2) of the Constitution. It provides that the composition and powers of the Commission are as contained in part 1 of the 3rd Schedule.

“Composition”, by definition according to page 207 of the Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, simply means, “the manner in which something is composed”. “composed of” is itself defined at page 286 of the Black’s Law Dictionary, Centennial edition, as, “formed of; consisting of”.

Even the New Webster’s Dictionary of English Language (International Edition), at page 200, also defines “composition” as meaning “content with respect to constituent elements”. To be sure, the word “constituent”, according to page 207 of the Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, means “essential part; component, element”; or “serving to form, compose or make up a unit or whole”.

It is therefore crystal clear and beyond disputation (except for those who may want to engage in banal intellectual masturbation) that the word “composition” as deployed in section 153 (2) of the Constitution regarding the membership of INEC simply means nothing beyond the aggregation of those bodies established under section 153(1). Only this meaning logically accords with the clear words and phrases used in all the definitions above stated.

Let us see them once more: “essential part; component elements’’; or, “serving to form, compose or make up a unit or whole”; or “formed of; “consisting of”; or “content with respect to constituent elements”.

The next question that agitates the mind is, what then is “member”, and how do we demonstrate that the meaning of “composition” as used in section 153 (2) simply means membership of INEC?

“Member”, says page 740 of Webster’s Ninth collegiate Dictionary, simply means “one of the individuals composing a group”; or “a constituent part of the whole”. Also, “member”, according to the Black’s Law Dictionary, Centennial edition, on the other hand, means “one of the persons constituting a family, partnership, association, corporation, guild, court, legislation or the like”.

Thus, exactly the same words are employed in all the dictionaries cited above to define the two words, “compose” and “member”. What this translates to is that the words, “composition” and “membership”, are not mutually exclusive, but can be used interchangeably to mean the same thing.

By simple analytical deduction, when section 153 (2) of the Constitution speaks of the composition of the Commission being as defined in part 1 of the 3rd Schedule to the Constitution, what the section is simply saying is that the membership of INEC shall be as contained in the said part 1 of the 3rd Schedule. By extension, and when stated slightly differently, the persons mentioned in the said part 1 of the 3rd Schedule relating to INEC are also all members of the Commission, notwithstanding that the word “member”, has not been specifically used therein. Membership and composition are therefore synonyms that can be used interchangeably here.

For the avoidance of doubt, paragraph 14 (1) of part 1 of the 3rd Schedule to the Constitution used the word “member” with respect to Chairman and 12 National Commissioners. However, subsection 3 of the same paragraph 14 went ahead to frontally make provisions for the establishment of the position of REC in each state of the Federation and the FCT. How then can it be reasonably argued that the same schedule 14 which recognizes not only the Chairman and the 12 National Commissioners, but also the same RECs of 36 states and the FCT, can decide to accord recognition to, and ascribe duties to the former alone, whilst excluding the latter?

It simply does not add up, both in realms of law, logic, morality and constitutionalism.

My humble take therefore, is that the Chairman of the Commission, the 12 National Commissioners and the 37 RECs are all members of the same INEC (Commission) family; no more, no less. None is a child of bastard. None suffers from any form of dubious or questionable pedigree. This is more so as their existence draws life from the same oxygen freely donated by the same paragraph 14, with one falling under subsection (1) and the other under subsection (2), within same part 1 of the 3rd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution, which clearly provides for the “composition” of INEC.

To deny this is to deny that six is the same thing as half a dozen and that Hamlet is same as the Prince of Denmark. It will thus amount to the greatest illogicality and delusional fallacy of all times to argue that RECs whilst being constitutionally recognized to “compose” or form the “composition” of the INEC, are at the same time denied of being “members” of the same INEC. It will amount to giving power and recognition with the left hand, and at the same time simultaneously snatching same back with the right hand. Such will not make any common, thematic, logical, legal, grammatical or constitutional or sense.

Mr Okoye argued strenuously that Paragraph 15(h) of part 1 of the 3^rd Schedule to the Constitution provides that INEC Headquarters (the Commission) shall “have powers to delegate any of its powers to Resident Electoral Commission”. So what? Does this mere administrative function overrule the constitutional importance of REC? While Section 6(2)(a) of the Act, a REC is answerable to The Commissioner by virtue of Section 6(2)(b), the REC holds for 5 years term which is renewable for another 5 years. And by virtue of Section 6(3), of the Act, a REC can only be removed by the President, acting on 2/3 majority vote of the Senate, due to infirmity of mind or body, or for misconduct, or for any other cause. Indeed, says Section 6(4) of the Electoral Act, the “appointment of a REC shall be in compliance with Section 14(3) of the Constitution…. and Section 4 of the Federal Character Commission (Establishment. Etc) Act”. Thus, section 6(4) of the Act imposed more qualifying criteria on the REC than the Chairman and 12 National Commissioners. (To be continued).

FUN TIMES

“MAN: I dreamt last night that women have started hating money.

WOMAN: Learn to sleep early and on a nice bed to avoid such stupid and horrible dreams”.

THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK

“Sincerity makes the very least person to be of more value than the most talented hypocrite”. (Charles Spurgeon).

Opinion

Rivers Crisis: A Note of Caution by Dr. Goodluck Jonathan

Published

2 days ago

October 5, 2024

Eric

I am aware that the local government election taking place in Rivers State today, October 5, has been a subject of great interest to political actors.

The political happenings in Rivers State in the past days is a cause for serious concern for everyone, especially lovers of democracy and all actors within the peace and security sector of our nation.

Elections are the cornerstone of democracy because they are the primary source of legitimacy. This process renews the faith of citizens in their country as it affords them the opportunity to have a say on who governs them.

Every election is significant, whether at national or sub-national levels as it counts as a gain and honour to democracy.

It is the responsibility of all stakeholders, especially state institutions, to work towards the promotion of sound democratic culture of which periodic election stands as a noble virtue.

Democracy is our collective asset, its growth and progress is dependent on governments commitment to uphold the rule of law and pursue the interest of peace and justice at all times.

Institutions of the state, especially security agencies must refrain from actions that could lead to breakdown of law and order.

Rivers State represents the gateway to the Niger Delta and threat to peace in the state could have huge security implications in the region.

Let me sound a note of caution to all political actors in this crisis to be circumspect and patriotic in the pursuit of their political ambition and relevance.

I am calling on the National Judicial Commission (NJC) to take action that will curb the proliferation of court orders and judgements, especially those of concurrent jurisdiction giving conflicting orders. This, if not checked, will ridicule the institution of the judiciary and derail our democracy.

The political situation in Rivers State, mirrors our past, the crisis of the Old Western Region. I, therefore, warn that Rivers should not be used as crystal that will form the block that will collapse our democracy.

State institutions especially the police and the judiciary and all other stakeholders must always work for public interest and promote common good such as peace, justice and equality.

– GEJ

Opinion

The End of a Political Party

Published

3 weeks ago

September 16, 2024

Eric

By Obianuju Kanu-Ogoko

It is deeply alarming and shameful to witness an elected official of an opposition party openly calling for the continuation of President Tinubu’s administration. This blatant betrayal goes against the very essence of democratic opposition and makes a mockery of the values the PDP is supposed to stand for.

Even more concerning is the deafening silence from North Central leadership. This silence comes at a price—For the funneled $3 million to buy off the courts for one of their Leaders’, the NC has compromised integrity, ensuring that any potential challenge is conveniently quashed. Such actions reveal a deeply compromised leadership, one that no longer stands for the people but for personal gain.

When a member of a political party publicly supports the ruling party, it raises the critical question: Who is truly standing for the PDP? When a Minister publicly insulted PDP and said that he is standing with the President, and you did nothing; why won’t others blatantly insult the party? Only under the Watch of this NWC has PDP been so ridiculed to the gutters. Where is the opposition we so desperately need in this time of political crisis? It is a betrayal of trust, of principles and of the party’s very foundation.

The leadership of this party has failed woefully. You have turned the PDP into a laughing stock, a hollow shell of what it once was. No political party with any credibility or integrity will even consider aligning or merging with the PDP at this rate. The decay runs deep and the shame is monumental.

WHAT A DISGRACE!

Opinion

Day Dele Momodu Made Me Live Above My Means

Published

1 month ago

September 1, 2024

Eric

By Uzor Maxim Uzoatu

These are dangerous days of gross shamelessness in totalitarian Nigeria.
Pathetic flaunting of clannish power is all the rage, and a good number of supposedly modern-day Nigerians have thrown their brains into the primordial ring.

One pathetic character came to me the other day stressing that the only way I can prove to him that I am not an ethnic bigot is to write an article attacking Dele Momodu!

I could not make any head or tail of the bloke’s proposition because I did not understand how ethnic bigotry can come up in an issue concerning Dele Momodu and my poor self.

The dotty guy made the further elaboration that I stand accused of turning into a “philosopher of the right” instead of supporting the government of the day which belongs to the left!

A toast to Karl Marx in presidential jet and presidential yacht!

I nearly expired with laughter as I remembered how one fat kept man who spells his surname as “San” (for Senior Advocate of Nigeria – SAN) wrote a wretched piece on me as an ethnic bigot and compelled one boozy rascal that dubiously studied law in my time at Great Ife to put it on my Facebook wall!

The excited tribesmen of Nigerian democracy and their giddy slaves have been greased to use attack as the first aspect of defence by calling all dissenting voices “ethnic bigots” as balm on their rotted consciences.

The bloke urging me to attack Dele Momodu was saddened when he learnt that I regarded the Ovation publisher as “my brother”!

Even amid the strange doings in Nigeria of the moment I can still count on some famous brothers who have not denied me such as Senator Babafemi Ojudu who privileged me to read his soon-to-be-published memoir as a fellow Guerrilla Journalist, and the lionized actor Richard Mofe-Damijo (RMD) who while on a recent film project in faraway Canada made my professor cousin over there to know that “Uzor is my brother!”

It is now incumbent on me to tell the world of the day that Dele Momodu made me live above my means.

All the court jesters, toadies, fawners, bootlickers and ill-assorted jobbers and hirelings put together can never be renewed with enough palliatives to countermand my respect for Dele Momodu who once told our friend in London who was boasting that he was chased out of Nigeria by General Babangida because of his activism: “Babangida did not chase you out of Nigeria. You found love with an oyinbo woman and followed her to London. Leave Babangida out of the matter!”

Dele Momodu takes his writing seriously, and does let me have a look at his manuscripts – even the one written on his presidential campaign by his campaign manager.

Unlike most Nigerians who are given to half measures, Dele Momodu writes so well and insists on having different fresh eyes to look at his works.

It was a sunny day in Lagos that I got a call from the Ovation publisher that I should stand by to do some work on a biography he was about to publish.

He warned me that I have only one day to do the work, and I replied him that I was raring to go because I love impossible challenges.

The manuscript of the biography hit my email in fast seconds, and before I could say Bob Dee a fat alert burst my spare bank account!

Being a ragged-trousered philanthropist, a la the title of Robert Tressel’s proletarian novel, I protested to Dele that it’s only beer money I needed but, kind and ever rendering soul that he is, he would not hear of it.

I went to Lagos Country Club, Ikeja and sacked my young brother, Vitus Akudinobi, from his office in the club so that I can concentrate fully on the work.

Many phone calls came my way, and I told my friends to go to my divine watering-hole to wait for me there and eat and drink all that they wanted because “money is not my problem!”

More calls came from my guys and their groupies asking for all makes of booze, isiewu, nkwobi and the assorted lots, and I asked them to continue to have a ball in my absence, that I would join them later to pick up the bill!

The many friends of the poor poet were astonished at the new-fangled wealth and confidence of the new member of the idle rich class!

It was a beautiful read that Dele Momodu had on offer, and by late evening I had read the entire book, and done some minor editing here and there.

It was then up to me to conclude the task by doing routine editing – or adding “style” as Tom Sawyer would tell his buddy Huckleberry Finn in the eponymous adventure books of Mark Twain.

I chose the style option, and I was indeed in my elements, enjoying all aspects of the book until it was getting to ten in the night, and my partying friends were frantically calling for my appearance.

I was totally satisfied with my effort such that I felt proud pressing the “Send” button on my laptop for onward transmission to Dele Momodu’s email.

I then rushed to the restaurant where my friends were waiting for me, and I had hardly settled down when one of Dele’s assistants called to say that there were some issues with the script I sent!

I had to perforce reopen up my computer in the bar, and I could not immediately fathom which of the saved copies happened to be the real deal.

One then remembered that there were tell-tale signs when the computer kept warning that I was putting too much on the clipboard or whatever.

It’s such a downer that after feeling so high that one had done the best possible work only to be left with the words of James Hadley Chase in The Sucker Punch: “It’s only when a guy gets full of confidence that he’s wide open for the sucker punch.”
Lesson learnt: keep it simple – even if you have been made to live above your means by Dele Momodu!

To end, how can a wannabe state agent and government apologist, a hired askari, hope to get me to write an article against a brother who has done me no harm whatsoever? Mba!

I admire Dele Momodu immensely for his courage of conviction to tell truth to power.