By Mike A. A. Ozekhome SAN

PROLOGUE

THE TYRANNY OF DEATH AND THE INDOMITABLE SPIRIT OF MANKIND

Death, shame on you. You have always killed the body, not the soul; never the legacy. Such is the fate of the last two men standing, Chief Edwin Kiagbodo Clark and Chief Ayo Adebanjo, who died few days from each other.

DEATH AND MANKIND

Let us now discuss the death that took them away. From the dawn of existence, mankind has lived under the unyielding shadow of death. It is the ultimate oppressor; the force that acknowledges neither power nor piety; neither nobility nor knowledge. It is the great leveller; the final conqueror before whom all men- kings and commoners; heroes and villains; patricians and plebeians; rich and poor-must bow. Wearing a monstrous visage with fangs bared, death stalks us unseen. It strikes without warning. It is indifferent to the hopes, aspirations, dreams and struggles of humanity. Like our shadow, it follows us everywhere, sticking to us like a second skin. Viktor Franki was dead right when he wrote, “Death is the greatest tyrant of all, it is the one that can take away our freedom, our dignity, and humanity”. Perhaps the most eloquent tribute to death came from Thomas Sowell. Hear him: “Death is the greatest leveler, the ultimate democrat, but it is also the greatest tyrant, for it treats all lives as equal in their insignificance”.

The Psalmist explains man’s fragility better: “Man is like a breath; his days are like a fleeting shadow.” (Psalm 144:4). Indeed, life is but a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. James 4:14 puts it better when it proclaims, “Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes” And now, that fleeting shadow has claimed the twin colossi of Chief Edwin Kiagbodo Clark and Chief Ayo Adebanjo. These were two towering figures whose lives were totally dedicated to the attainment of justice, democracy, and the eternal struggle against oppression. They stood like ancient baobabs in the political landscape of Nigeria, their roots intertwined with the fight for equity, their voices thunderous in the corridors of power.

Expressing the fleetness of life, Macbeth in Act 5, Scene 5 of William Shakespeare’s Macbeth, intoned that “Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player, that struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more. It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

Yet, for all their power and defiance, they too have fallen to the callous hands of death; embraced by the inevitable grasp of mortality. “The death of a righteous man is never the death of his deeds, nor the end of his influence.” This is the paradox of existence: death takes men, but it cannot take away their legacy. It silences voices, but it cannot silence the echoes of the truth they spoke. It buries bodies, but it cannot bury the fire they ignited in the hearts of those they left behind.

Consider the tale of Achilles, the greatest warrior of Greek mythology. He was given a choice: a long, uneventful life or a short life filled with glory that would make his name immortal. He chose the latter, knowing that though his body would perish, his name would be sung in eternity. Like Achilles, Pa Clark and Pa Adebanjo chose the path of impact over the comfort of obscurity. Their names, their struggles, their legacy, will not be forgotten. NEVER!!!

Death, in its arrogance wrongly believes it has silenced them. But can death truly claim victory over men whose legacy outlives their mortal forms? The answer is an emphatic no. Death may take the body, but it cannot take the impact. It may silence the voice, but it cannot silence the ideology. The greatest flaw of death is its inability to erase the echoes of greatness. The African proverb is right that “the dead are not gone; they are only in another room”. As Haruki Murakami once put it, “Death is not the opposite of life, but a part of it”. Julius Caesar in Williams Shakespeare’s epic by the same title, “Julius Caesar” defanged death when he refused the entreaties of Calpurnia, his wife not to go to the Capital for fear of being assassinated by the conspirators. He shredded death thus, “No, Caesar shall not. Danger knows full well that Caesar is more dangerous than he. We are two lions littered in one day, and I the elder and more terrible”. (Act 2 Scene 2).

Yet, death still claimed Pa Clark and Pa Adebanjo as it has claimed countless others before them. Death will still claim more. Its bacchanalian propensity to consume mortals like Bacchus the god of wine is relentless. The finality of mortality forces a painful question upon us: If even men of such towering stature like Clark and Adebanjo cannot defy death, then what hope does mankind have?

But therein lies the irony. True death is not the cessation of breath but the erasure of memory. These men are not truly gone. Their essence remains immortalized in the ideals they fought for, in the words they spoke, and in the lives they touched.

We are reminded of the African proverb: “A man dies twice. The first is when he breathes his last; the second is when his name is spoken for the last time.” Pa Clark and Pa Adebanjo, by virtue of their outstanding works, have ensured that the second death shall never come. Their names will be inscribed in the annals of history; their voices will continue to echo through the ages. In the grand battle between mankind and death, memory is the battlefield. And men like Clark and Adebanjo never truly lose out. They have been inducted into the pantheon of great men.

THE GIANTS AND THEIR ETERNAL STRUGGLES

To understand the lives of Chief Edwin Kiagbodo Clark and Chief Ayo Adebanjo is to understand the very fabric of Nigeria’s history, its triumphs and tragedies, its betrayals and its resilience. These were not just men who merely lived through history; they made history themselves. They were not silent observers; they were architects of change and warriors in the relentless fight for justice.

Yet, even the greatest of warriors must one day lay down their swords. The passing of these two titans forces us to confront the painful reality that no man, no matter how powerful, can defeat the tyranny of time. It is as the Bible states in Ecclesiastes 9:11, “The race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favour to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all.”

But if time has claimed their mortal frames, it has not diminished their impact. Death has never been able to claim greatness. It has tried throughout the ages but failed abysmally. Silencing Socrates did not kill philosophy. Crucifying Christ did not end Christianity. Assassinating Martin Luther King Jr. did not halt the civil rights movement. Killing Adaka Boro and Ken Saro Wiwa did not end Niger Delta agitation. Likewise, the passing of Chief Clark and Chief Adebanjo will not end their struggle. “O Death, where is thy sting?” Apostle Paul knew what he was doing when he compared death to a bee that has lost its sting.

CHIEF EDWIN CLARK, THE LION OF THE NIGER DELTA

This Nationalist spent all his life in ceaseless advocacy, ensuring that his people were not reduced to mere spectators in a nation built on their resources. He was not just a politician; he was a movement, a force of nature. He spoke for the voiceless, demanded justice for the marginalized, and carried the weight of an entire region’s hopes on his shoulders. Beyond these, his common cliché was “we are all Nigerians” a clear exemplification of this Pan-Nigerianity.

The story of Edwin Clark is the story of a man who refused to be silent or silenced. His life was defined by resistance, relentless advocacy and the ceaseless fight for equity. From his earliest days, he knew that the Niger Delta, despite being the economic heartbeat and financial basket of Nigeria, had been condemned to perpetual marginalization and squalor. Oil flowed beneath the feet of his people, yet poverty sat on their shoulders. Their land was rich, but their lives were poor. There is constant light in the environment, not from electricity, but from gas flaring that destroys both aquatic and agrarian life. There is “water water everywhere”, but like in the Ancient Marina, none fit enough to drink. Clark refused to accept this man-imposed destiny as their lot.

He fiercely championed resource control, true fiscal federalism and the rights of the marginalized oil-bearing communities, knowing that freedom is never freely given but must be fought for and won. His voice thundered in political arenas; his torch lit dark crevices; his presence was felt in the highest echelons of power; and his influence shaped the policies that sought to address the inequities of his time.

One of Pa Clark’s defining moments was the 2005 National Political Reform Conference midwifed by former president, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, where he led the South South Delegates Forum in one of the most historic protests against the injustice of oil revenue allocation. When Northern delegates refused to allow an 18% derivation formula for oil-producing states, Clark led a mass walkout. This was not just a political maneuvre; it was an act of defiance; a statement that injustice must never be negotiated, tolerated but must be rejected. I was the spokesperson for the entire South South delegates at the Conference.

A true leader does not retreat; and Clark never did. Even at 97, Pa Clark was still always on television screen, pontificating, advocating, teaching, directing and crusading for good governance, restructuring and a strong Nigerian nation. His life was a testament to the words of the legendary poet, Dylan Thomas, who wrote: “Do not go gentle into that good night. Rage, rage against the dying of the light.” Clark never surrendered to injustice. And though death has claimed him, his voice will continue to echo in every struggle for equity in Nigeria. His light will continue to illuminate dark paths towards national resurgimento, restructuring, equity, egalitarianism and social justice.

AYO ADEBANJO: THE ETERNAL FLAME OF IDEOLOGY

Chief Ayo Adebanjo, on the other hand, was the embodiment of ideological purity. As a disciple of Chief Obafemi Awolowo, he stood firmly by the principles of federalism, free education, and self-determination. His words carried the weight of history. His defiance against injustice never wavered; and his belief in a restructured Nigeria remained unshaken even in his final days. He was, as Marcus Garvey once said, “a lion who did not live to entertain hyenas.”

If Chief Edwin Clark was a warrior for the Niger Delta and enthronement of justice in the Nigerian space, Chief Ayo Adebanjo was a lion of ideological purity. In a world where political leaders switch allegiances as easily as changing tissue papers, Chief Ayo Adebanjo was steadfast. He remained unwavering in his ideological beliefs. From his earliest days in the Action Group under the mentorship of Chief Obafemi Awolowo, Adebanjo embraced a set of principles that would define his entire life-true federalism, free education, regional autonomy, and social justice. While many leaders evolved into political opportunists, Adebanjo remained a true disciple and guardian of Awolowo’s ideals, unshaken by the temptations of power.

Pa Adebanjo was imprisoned, harassed and exiled; yet he never compromised. In 1993, when the military annulled MKO Abiola’ selection, Adebanjo was at the forefront of NADECO (National Democratic Coalition), risking his limbs and life to demand the restoration of democracy. He was not one for silent negotiations; his brand of politics was radical, bold and unapologetic. “There is no diplomacy in truth,” he often said.

Chief Adebanjo’s fearless advocacy extended into his old age. In his 90s, he was still one of the loudest voices demanding the restructuring of Nigeria. While younger politicians hesitated or defected, fearful of repercussions, Adebanjo spoke with fire and clarity, insisting that Nigeria’s survival depended on true federalism. His courage reminds us of Winston Churchill’s words: “To each, there comes in their lifetime a special moment when they are figuratively tapped on the shoulder and offered the chance to do something unique to them and their talents. What a tragedy if that moment finds them unprepared or unqualified for what could have been their finest hour.”

Pa Adebanjo did not just seize his moment; he made sure every moment of his life was dedicated to fighting for justice. If Chief Edwin Clark and Chief Ayo Adebanjo have taught us anything, it is that death’s greatest weakness is its inability to erase legacy. It is said that when Alexander the Great lay on his deathbed, he ordered his generals to carry his coffin with his hands stretched out. When asked why, he said: “Let the world see that even the greatest conqueror leaves this world empty-handed.”

But some men do not leave empty-handed. They leave behind them movements, ideas, ideologies, revolutions and a generation greatly inspired to carry on their good works. That is the difference between ordinary men and legends. Clark and Adebanjo were legends.

Death thought it could silence Chief Clark and Chief Adebanjo, but death has yet failed. It could not erase or silence their names which are now immortal, etched into the pages of Nigeria’s history. Their ideas and ideals will live on in the youthful activists who demand a just Nigeria; in the communities that still fight for fairness; and in the common people who refuse to accept oppression as their fate.

Therefore, even as we mourn these two legends, we must recognize that they have won the only battle that matters-the battle against irrelevance; against obscurity. Surely, their bodies will rest, but their fight continues. They have transmitted from mortality to immortality.

DEFYING DEATH THROUGH LEGACY

As I reflect on the passing of Chief Edwin Kiagbodo Clark and Chief Ayo Adebanjo, I am struck by one immutable truth: death may take the man, but it cannot take his legacy. The true measure of a life is not in its duration but in its impact. These two titans of justice and democracy may have departed, but their spirits remain embedded in the struggles they fought and the victories they secured. The philosopher, Marcus Aurelius once said, “What we do now echoes in eternity.” And indeed, Chiefs Clark and Adebanjo lived lives that will echo far beyond their years. They were not merely politicians; they were symbols of defiance, embodiments of truth, and sentinels of justice who challenged impunity and spoke truth to power.

Their deaths, like those of all great men, force us to ask: What remains after the body has returned to dust? What is the true test of immortality? If it is in the endurance of one’s impact, then these men have conquered death itself. Thus, even death could not kill them.

MY PERSONAL ENCOUNTERS WITH PA ADEBANJO

I have had the rare privilege of knowing and working closely alongside these giants in their lifetime. My undiluted respect for them is not borne out of distant admiration, but from personal experiences; from standing in the trenches with them in the many battles for a better Nigeria. Of Chief Ayo Adebanjo, I had earlier written with conviction thus:
“Chief Ayo Adebanjo is truly one of the very last of the Mohicans – the last men standing. Here’s wishing and praying that he outlives his father and continues well beyond his 100-year anniversary in good health, fine cheer, and peace that passeth all understanding.”
(https://mikeozekhomeschambers.com/chief-ayo-adebanjo-a-member-of-the-dwindling-mohicans). But Pa Adebanjo died four years shy of the 100 years I had wished him. Only on March 18, 2024, the Patriots converged at the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs, Lagos, to honour late Professor Ben Nwabueze, SAN (the greatest constitutional lawyer to have emerged from the soil of Africa), at a National Dialogue on the constitutional future of Nigeria. I delivered the keynote address titled, “The Never-ending call for a new people’s Constitution”. At the event, Chief Adebanjo bared his fangs, lamenting the poor state of the Nigerian nation. He reiterated his call for restructuring, regional autonomy, social justice and a fair federalism.

Papa Adebanjo’s passing is therefore not just a personal loss but a national one. He was more than a political figure; he was an ideologue, a moral force in a landscape often devoid of conscience. He lived not for himself but for the idea of a fair and just Nigeria, and his unyielding advocacy for restructuring will not be forgotten. While he fought from the NADECO flank, I fought from the human rights and pro-democracy odeon. We always converged towards achieving common goals of having a better and more equitable Nigeria. His death becomes more painful to me because only in October, 2024, Chief Adebanjo forwarded one of the 5o books I presented to the public on October 17, 2024. He forwarded the book titled, “Nigeria’s Unforgettable Events”. And Pa Adebanjo has now departed. Thank you for goading me on for encouraging me.

MY PERSONAL ENCOUNTERS WITH PA CLARK

My encounters with Pa Edwin Clark were equally profound. I remember vividly the 2005 National Political Reform Conference, where I was entrusted with the role of Publicity Secretary and Spokesperson for the South-South Delegates Forum. It was there that I saw first hand Clark’s brilliance, his uncommon courage and defiance; and his ability to command respect from all and sundry. He was the undisputed leader of the South-South Delegation, and under his guidance and leadership of a field Marshal, we fought for a well-structured federation; for devolution of power; and for a fair derivation formula for oil-producing states.

Thus, when our proposal for a modest 18% derivation was rejected by the Northern delegates who said the South-South should even be grateful for 13% it was having, Clark led the historic walkout; an event that has since been termed the “First Walkout” in Nigeria’s conference history. It was a moment of historic reckoning, a statement that the oppression of the oil-bearing communities of the Niger Delta would not go unanswered. I stood with him, alongside other progressive minds, as we challenged the status quo and demanded justice and fairness. That was the kind of man Pa Clark was-fearless, courageous, bold, unrelenting and unbowed.

Pa Clark repeated his leadership qualities at the 2014 National Conference, where at 86 then, he fought for true fiscal federalism, like a trojan. He led the entire South-South to seek for justice and fair play in a warped federal set up. I worked ferociously with him. I was named the “Cicero of the 2014 National Conference” by the Conference leadership comprising of late Hon. Justice Idris Legbo Kutigi, JSC (rtd); GCON; Prof Bolaji Akinyemi; CFR and Chief (Dr) Valerie-Janette Azinge, SAN, OFR.

Pa Clark was a father to all; a mentor to millions; a scholar; an outstanding lawyer, and an activist who led from the front. He loathed sycophancy, servility and political opportunism. You either loved him passionately, or hated him malevolently; but never could you ignore him. He regarded me as his son’ encouraged me; energized me; and goaded me on. In October, 2024, Pa Clark happily forwarded one of the 50 books I presented to the public on October 17, 2024. The title of the book he forwarded is “Nigeria’s Evolution and the Political Players”. And now, papa is gone. Farewell sir.

THE TITANS’ FINAL DEFIANCE: A LEGACY THAT CANNOT BE BURIED

It is often said that “a man dies twice: once when his body ceases to function, and again when his name is spoken for the last time.” If that is true, then Clark and Adebanjo will never truly die. Their names will be spoken for generations to come, their contributions studied in classrooms, and their courage invoked by young activists who refuse to accept a Nigeria that is anything less than just.

Like Moses leading the Israelites through the Red Sea, they parted the waters of oppression and repression, clearing a path of for those who would come after them. Like Socrates drinking the hemlock based on his conditions, they stood by their convictions even when the price was too high. And like Mandela in Robben Island, they fought a system designed to silence them and won.

THE CURTAINS NOW DRAWN

If death thought it could kill them, it has grossly miscalculated. For their works remain; their speeches still resonate; their ideas still shape the destiny of Nigeria.

It is a cruel paradox of existence that we must often celebrate greatness in the shadow of its departure. That we must find words to honor titans whose very absence renders language inadequate. But if time is the great equalizer, then it is also the thief of presence. It robs us of our icons, leaving us with only echoes of wisdom where once stood the steadfast guardians of justice. Yet, not all echoes fade.

As I write this elegy for two legends, my heart is heavy and sad, not for the duo, but for Nigeria for whom they laboured for life long. Her story has not been encouraging. But my resolve is strengthened to fight on. The best way to honour them is not through mere words, but through action. To those of us who remain committed on this side, their deaths must not mark the end of their battles; it must mark their rebirth in those of us left behind.

They have passed the torch on to us. It is now our duty to ensure that the torch continues to shine brightly and that their labours and sacrifices are not in vain. Aluta continua, Victoria acerta.
Rest well, papa Edwin Clark.
Rest well, papa Ayo Adebanjo.

By Prof Mike Ozekhome SAN

INTRODUCTION

This paper provides a comprehensive evaluation of Nigeria’s political leadership from independence in 1960 to the present, with a focus on the persistent challenge of corruption. Nigeria’s journey from colonial rule to self-governance has been marked by cycles of hope, instability, and economic mismanagement, much of which has been driven by corrupt practices entrenched in both military and civilian governments. The study explores key periods in Nigeria’s political history, including the First Republic, military rule, and the Fourth Republic, highlighting how corruption has consistently undermined the country’s potential for sustainable development and effective governance. By examining the leadership approaches of key figures such as Olusegun Obasanjo, Muhammadu Buhari, and Ahmed Bola Tinubu, the paper traces the evolution of corruption in the Nigerian state and the various reform efforts that have been attempted. It concludes with recommendations for strengthening institutions, fostering electoral reforms, engaging youth, and promoting economic diversification as critical steps toward breaking the cycle of corruption and building a transparent and accountable governance system in Nigeria.

THE NEXUS OF LEADERSHIP AND CORRUPTION IN NIGERIA’S POLITICAL EVOLUTION

Since gaining independence in 1960, Nigeria’s political trajectory has been characterized by a mix of hope, turmoil, and persistent challenges, with leadership and corruption standing at the forefront of its journey. The dawn of independence was met with widespread optimism, as Nigerians believed that self-governance would pave the way for unity, prosperity, and equitable development. However, the newly independent nation was also deeply divided along ethnic, regional, and religious lines, fault lines that would complicate governance and the exercise of power from the very beginning. As Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, Nigeria’s first Prime Minister, remarked, “I am convinced, and I want you also to be convinced, that the future of this vast country must depend, in the main, on the efforts of ourselves to help ourselves. This we cannot do if we do not work together in unity. Indeed, unity today is our greatest concern, and it is the duty off every one of us to work so that we may strengthen it.” (BlackPast. (n.d.). 1957: Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, first speech as Prime Minister. BlackPast. <https://www.blackpast.org/global-african-history/1957-abubakar-tafawa-balewa-first-speech-prime-minister/>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). Yet, this optimism would soon be overshadowed by political instability, ethnic divide and rising corruption.

Nigeria’s political history, from its independence to the present day, can be viewed as a series of cycles each marked by the rise of leaders, the accompanying hope for reform, and the eventual disappointment as corruption became deeply entrenched in the fabric of governance. Military coups and civilian governments alike have struggled to combat corruption, which has repeatedly hindered Nigeria’s ability to achieve sustained economic development and political stability. From the First Republic’s collapse under the weight of ethnic tensions and corruption to the military’s authoritarian grip during the 1980s and 1990s, Nigeria’s political leadership has often been marred by self-interest, mismanagement, and the prioritization of regional over national interests.

At the heart of Nigeria’s political crises lies the problem of corruption, a theme that has become an inseparable part of the country’s political narrative. Whether under military dictatorships or civilian rule, corruption has remained pervasive, affecting every level of government and public life. Leaders have come and gone, each promising to root out graft and restore accountability, but few have succeeded in achieving meaningful reform. The oil boom of the 1970s, which should have catapulted Nigeria into a new era of prosperity, instead deepened the corruption problem, as political elites siphoned off the country’s wealth for personal gain (Yakub, M. U. (2007). Financing small and medium enterprises in Nigeria: The small and medium industries equity investment scheme experience. Central Bank of Nigeria. <http://library.cbn.gov.ng:8092/jspui/bitstream/123456789/248/1/Pages%20from%20Vol%2032%20No%202%20April-June%202007-6%20Maaji%20Umar%20Yakub.pdf>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). The phrase “Nigeria is not suffering from poverty; it is suffering from the mismanagement of wealth” succinctly captures the frustration many Nigerians have felt over the years.

As Nigeria transitioned into the Fourth Republic in 1999, following years of military rule, hopes were rekindled that democratic governance would bring with it transparency, accountability, and an end to the endemic corruption that had crippled the nation. However, even in the democratic era, corruption scandals, such as the Halliburton bribery case and the mismanagement of oil revenues, continued to undermine public trust. Successive leaders like, Olusegun Obasanjo, Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, Goodluck Jonathan, and Muhammadu Buhari came to power with anti-corruption platforms, but each faced significant challenges in overcoming the deep-rooted patronage networks and institutionalized graft that characterized Nigeria’s political system.

Today, as Nigeria moves further into the 21st century, the country remains at a critical juncture. The election of Bola Ahmed Tinubu in 2023 was seen by some as an opportunity for renewal, but his rise to power was also clouded by long standing allegations of corruption, raising questions about whether true reform can ever be achieved. The challenges Nigeria faces economic inequality, insecurity, and the enduring grip of corruption are as pressing as ever. The struggle for good governance continues, and the path forward is fraught with obstacles. Yet, as the Nigerian proverb wisely notes, “No matter how long the night, the day is sure to come.” The hope for a better future remains, but the journey toward that brighter day is far from certain.

POST-INDEPENDENCE DAWN: FOUNDATIONS OF POLITICAL LEADERSHIP (1960-1979)

THE BIRTH OF A NEW NATION: SETTING THE STAGE

In 1960, Nigeria stood at the cusp of a monumental shift, shaking off the shackles of British colonial rule to embark on a journey of self-governance. The elation of independence echoed across the vast expanse of the country, from the arid north to the humid coasts in the south. Nigerians, filled with hope, believed that their newfound freedom would usher in an era of prosperity, unity, and justice. The iconic words of Nigeria’s first Prime Minister, Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, echoed this optimism: “This is a wonderful day, and it is all the more wonderful because we have awaited it with increasing impatience, compelled to watch one country after another overtaking us on the road when we had so nearly reached our goal.” (Premium Times. (2020). Nigeria@60: What Tafawa Balewa said in his Independence speech. Premium Times. <https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/more-news/417848-nigeria60-what-tafawa-balewa-said-in-his-independence-speech.html?tztc=1>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.)

However, as the Nigerian flag was hoisted on October 1, 1960, the country was already grappling with its own set of complexities. The euphoria of independence masked deeper issues. Nigeria was a nation deeply divided along ethnic, religious, and regional lines (Nigerian Studies Association. (n.d.). Political leadership and corruption in Nigeria since 1960: A socio-economic analysis. Nigerian Studies Association.< https://unh.edu/nigerianstudies/articles/Issue2/Political_leadership.pdf>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.) While its leaders preached unity, it was clear that managing the diversity of over 250 ethnic groups would be a daunting task (Mba, P. O. (2013). On ethnicity and ethnic conflict management in Nigeria. African Journal on Conflict Resolution, 13(1). <https://www.accord.org.za/ajcr-issues/on-ethnicity-and-ethnic-conflict-management-in-nigeria/>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). Each group had its aspirations, and the seeds of political discord were already germinating.

COLONIAL LEGACIES: THE INHERITED POLITICAL LANDSCAPE

Nigeria’s political landscape, in its infancy, bore the deep imprints of British colonialism. The colonial masters had governed the country through a policy of indirect rule, particularly in the north, where they co-opted traditional leaders to maintain order (Wikipedia contributors. (n.d.). Indirect rule. Wikipedia.< https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indirect_rule>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). In the more “modern” southern regions, however, a growing educated elite comprising professionals, activists, and intellectuals began to demand more political participation(ibid). These regional differences, crafted and cemented during the colonial era, laid the foundation for the political crises that would soon follow.

As the British handed over power, they left behind a federal structure that grouped Nigeria into three regions: the Northern Region, dominated by the Hausa-Fulani; the Western Region, primarily populated by the Yoruba; and the Eastern Region, home to the Igbo (Wikipedia contributors. (n.d.). Colonial Nigeria. Wikipedia. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_Nigeria>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). This arrangement, while seemingly representative, only exacerbated the existing divisions. The new government inherited a state where regionalism had become the central organizing principle of political life. Ethnic identities, rather than national unity, took precedence, and each region vied for dominance in the post-colonial government.

THE FIRST REPUBLIC: PROMISE AND BETRAYAL

The First Republic (1960-1966) began with high hopes. Nnamdi Azikiwe, an Igbo and a prominent nationalist leader, became Nigeria’s first president, a largely ceremonial role under the Westminster system of government (Wikipedia contributors. (n.d.). Nnamdi Azikiwe. Wikipedia. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nnamdi_Azikiwe>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). Tafawa Balewa, a northern Muslim, took on the more powerful position of prime minister (Encyclopaedia Britannica. (n.d.). Abubakar Tafawa Balewa. Encyclopaedia Britannica. <https://www.britannica.com/biography/Abubakar-Tafawa-Balewa>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). Their partnership was seen as symbolic of Nigeria’s diversity and unity. But beneath this veneer of collaboration, cracks were already beginning to show.

The first major challenge of the Balewa government was managing the power dynamics among the regions (Academic Journals. (2013). Leadership crisis and political instability in Nigeria: Interrogating the nexus. African Journal of Political Science and International Relations, 7(2), 65-74. <https://academicjournals.org/journal/AJPSIR/article-full-text-pdf/8F1BD3064785>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). Each region had its own political party. The Northern People’s Congress (NPC) in the north, the Action Group (AG) in the west, and the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) in the east (Joseph, R. A. (1983). Class, state, and prebendal politics in Nigeria. The Journal of Commonwealth & Comparative Politics, 21(3), 21-38. <https://www.jstor.org/stable/2784073>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). These parties, rather than promoting national interests, sought to advance regional and ethnic concerns. As the Yoruba adage goes, “Ile ni a ti n ko eso r’ode,” which means “Charity begins at home.” The politicians of the First Republic took this maxim to heart only their “homes” were not Nigeria as a whole but their respective regions.

The 1964 federal elections were a turning point. The elections were marred by widespread allegations of electoral fraud, violence, and voter intimidation, particularly in the Western Region (Sarma, A. (2023). Impact of leadership on organizational performance: A critical review. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Analysis, 6(1), 25-34. <https://ijmra.in/v6i1/Doc/4.pdf>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). The political unrest that followed the controversial results gave rise to what became known as the “Wild Wild West.” (Vanguard News. (2013). Olunloyo and the Wild Wild West. Vanguard. <https://www.vanguardngr.com/2013/12/olunloyo-wild-wild-west/>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). The Western Region descended into chaos, with political thugs, or “agberos,” clashing violently in the streets. The rule of law crumbled, and the situation became a powder keg ready to explode.

Balewa, despite his personal reputation for honesty and integrity, struggled to hold the country together. The political instability was exacerbated by economic challenges. Nigeria’s economic policies, inherited from the colonial government, were designed to benefit the British economy more than the newly independent nation (ibid). Agriculture, the backbone of Nigeria’s economy, was regionally specialized, the north produced groundnuts, the west produced cocoa, and the east was known for palm oil (Okeke, M. (2017). The Nigerian economy before the discovery of crude oil. ResearchGate. <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322184134_The_Nigerian_Economy_Before_the_Discovery_of_Crude_Oil>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). While these crops generated revenue, they also deepened regionalism, as each region became economically dependent on its own cash crops rather than fostering national economic integration. (To be continued).

THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK

“Leadership is diving for a loose ball, getting the crowd involved, getting other players involved. It’s being able to take it as well as dish it out. That’s the only way you’re going to get respect from the players). – Larry Bird.

LAST LINE

God bless my numerous global readers for always keeping faith with the Sunday Sermon on the Mount of the Nigerian Project, by humble me, Prof Mike Ozekhome, SAN, CON, OFR, FCIArb., LL.M, Ph.D, LL.D, D.Litt, D.Sc, DHL, DA. Kindly come with me to next week’s exciting dissertation.

By Prof Mike Ozekhome SAN

INTRODUCTION

In a landmark decision in ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION V. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ABIA STATE & ORS (2024) LPELR-62576(SC) last year, the Supreme Court gave the local government system full autonomy, warning governors to keep their political fingers off Local Government Councils (LGCs). The legal status of the LGCs in Osun State has however been the subject of intense political and judicial debate following the 2022 local government elections. The matter has seen multiple judicial determinations, culminating in two critical Federal High Court judgements; one obtained by the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and the other by the Action Peoples Party (APP). While both judgements invalidated the elections conducted by the Osun State Independent Electoral Commission (OSSIEC), the judgement secured by APP remains the extant, binding, and subsisting legal authority, as no superior court has set it aside.

DISTORTION OF THE ESSENCE OF THE JUDGMENTS

In recent times, misinterpretations and misinformation have sought to distort the legal position, with some claiming that a recent Court of Appeal judgement reinstated the sacked local government officials. However, a critical examination of the Court of Appeal’s latest decision shows that it merely struck out the PDP’s appeal on the ground that no cause of action had arisen at the time of its filing. The position of the law in this regard is that when judgements are not to the substance of a case, they do not change the rights and liabilities of parties. See the case of IGBUNBOR V. AFOLABI (2001) FWLR (Pt. 59) 1284 at 165. Importantly, the Court of Appeal did not nullify or overturn the subsisting Federal High Court judgement granted in favour of APP, which therefore remains the authoritative and binding authority affecting the rights of the parties.

It is therefore meet that we clarify the foggy situation by analyzing the relevant judgements, applicable laws, and legal principles that govern the status of the 2022 Osun local government elections. This analysis will demonstrate that the local government councils were legally dissolved and that no subsequent judicial pronouncement had restored them. It will also demonstrate that the latest foiled invasion of many LGCs across Osun State by some APC persons is unconstitutional, illegal and amounted to self-help.

THE 2022 OSUN LOCAL GOVERNMENT ELECTIONS HALLMARKED LEGAL CHALLENGES

The dispute over the Osun local government elections actually commenced in 2022, following the conduct of the elections by OSSIEC. The elections were challenged in court on the basis that OSSIEC had failed to comply with the mandatory provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022, specifically sections 28, 29, 32, 98, and 150 thereof.

The People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and the Action Peoples Party (APP) had separately instituted legal actions at the Federal High Court, seeking to have the elections nullified. The basis of these suits was OSSIEC’s alleged non-compliance with statutory provisions and constitutional violations.

THE PDP SUIT IN BRIEF

In the case of PDP, it was alleged that OSSIEC was planning to conduct local government election in Osun State in violation of the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022, specifically sections 28, 29, 30 and 150 thereof. PDP also called on the Federal High Court to apply the decision of the Supreme Court in OSSIEC & ANOR V. ACTION CONGRESS & ORS (2010) LLJR-SC (delivered in 2010), to the effect that any notice of a local government election which is not in compliance with the Electoral Act is null and void. The law in existence as at the time of filing the said suit was the OSSIEC Law, 2015 (as amended).

While the suit was pending, the Osun State House of Assembly repealed the existing 2015 amended OSSIEC Law, and enacted the new OSSIEC Law, 2022, which prescribed 360 days’ notice for election, same as contained in the Electoral Act, 2022. OSSIEC then, during the pendency of the action, published a notice of election prescribing only 60 days as against the 360 days specified by the OSSIEC Law and the Electoral Act.

PDP, then, by an order of court, amended its processes to bring in the new development. OSSIEC still went ahead with the conduct of the election and the All Progressives Congress (APC) participated despite the pendency of the suit at the Federal High Court. It was after the election that the APC and some of its candidates brought a joinder application to the suit in a representative capacity, for all its candidates who reportedly participated at the election. The Federal High Court granted their application for joinder and the whole court processes were amended to reflect all the parties and issues. On 25th November, 2022, the Federal High Court delivered a judgment in the suit, nullifying the election and consequentially sacking all the purported elected officials.

SUMMARY OF THE APP SUIT

The APP’s suit was similar to the PDP suit in all respects; the only difference being that the APP’s suit was filed after the enactment of the OSSIEC Law 2022 and after the publication of the 60-day election notice by OSSIEC, as against 360 days provided by the OSSIEC Law and the Electoral Act.

While both parties obtained favourable judgements, the judgement in the APP suit has become the legally binding decision, as APC’s appeal against it was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on the 13th of January, 2025, for want of diligent prosecution. This dismissal rendered the APP judgement the final and only subsisting authority on the matter.

JUDICIAL INTERVENTION ON THE VALIDITY OF THE ELECTIONS

A. The FHC Judgement in APP v. OSIEC (Suit No. FHC/OS/CS/75/2022)

In this case filed by the Action Peoples Party (APP), the Federal High Court (FHC), delivered a landmark judgement that rendered the October 15, 2022, Osun Statw local government elections null and void. The court held that the elections violated the Electoral Act, 2022, and were also inconsistent with the 1999 Nigerian Constitution.

The FHC in the APP case held as follows:

– “The election into local government councils across Osun State held on the 15th of October 2022, pursuant to the notice of election issued on the 15th of August 2022, is hereby declared unconstitutional, invalid, null, and void for violation of the Constitution and breach of Sections 28, 29, 32, 98, and 150 of the Electoral Act, 2022.”

– “All persons or individuals occupying offices in the state local government councils by virtue of the said election are accordingly sacked from holding such offices.”

– “Sections 25 and 26 of the Osun State Independent Electoral Commission Law, 2022, having been enacted in contravention of Paragraph 12 of Part II of the Second Schedule to the Constitution and being inconsistent with Sections 29 and 32 of the Electoral Act, 2022, are hereby struck down.”

I agree with the decision of the FHC because it is trite law that any law that is inconsistent with the Constitution is null and void and must be struck down because the Constitution is the grundnorm of the land (see section 1(3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 [as amended]). The Supreme Court, Per JAURO, JSC, pronounced on the supremacy of the Constitution in NPF & ORS V POLICE SERVICE COMMISSION (2023) LPELR-60782(SC) (P.154, paras. A-F), thus:

“It is equally imperative to restate the elementary principle of the supremacy of the Constitution. The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is the grundnorm, the basic law of the land. It stands head and shoulders above any other law or instrument enacted by the National Assembly, State House of Assembly or any other person or authority empowered in that regard. It is from the Constitution that every other enactment or instrument derive their validity and binding force. The doctrine of the Supremacy of the Nigerian Constitution is traceable to Section 1(1) and (3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as altered), which provides thus: “1. Supremacy of the Constitution (1) This Constitution is supreme and its provisions shall have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout the Federal Republic of Nigeria. (3) If any other law is inconsistent with the provisions of this Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail, and that other law shall to the extent of the inconsistency be void.”

Consequently, as was decided by the Supreme Court in the case of PEENOK INVESTMENTS LIMITED V HOTEL PRESIDENTIAL (1982) 12 SC 1, there is undoubted power in the Court to declare null and void any law that conflicts with the provisions of the Constitution”. See also the cases of HON. INAJOKU & ORS V. ADELEKE & ORS (2007) ALL FWLR; OLAFISOYE V. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA (2004) ALL FWLR 1106; AINABEBHOLO V. EDO STATE UNIVERSITY WORKERS FARMERS MULTIPURPOSE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD (2007) ALL FWLR 712; PDP v. EDEDE & ANOR (2022) LPELR-57480(CA); PRESIDENT OF THE FRN & ORS v. ISA & ORS (2015) LPELR-25981(CA); and, AG FEDERATION & ORS v. ABUBAKAR & ORS (2007) LPELR-3(SC).

The legal implication of this judgement cannot be overstated. By declaring the 2022 Osun State LG elections unconstitutional, null and void, the court completely erased any legal foundation for the existence of the local government councils elected through that flawed process. The said APP judgement was also a judgement in rem, meaning that it applied to the whole world, all parties and stakeholders, and non-parties alike, irrespective of whether or not they participated in the litigation. In DIKE & ORS V. NZEKA II & ORS (1986) LPELR-945 (SC), the Supreme Court underscored this point most lucidly when it held:

“… A judgment is said to be in rem when it is an adjudication pronounced upon the status of some particular thing or subject matter by a Tribunal having the jurisdiction and the competence to pronounce on that Status. Such a judgment is usually and invariably founded on proceedings instituted against or on something or subject-matter whose status or condition is to be determined. It is thus a solemn declaration on the status of some persons or thing. It is therefore binding on all persons in so far as their interests in the status of the property or person are concerned. That is why a judgment in rem is a judgment contra mundum – binding on the whole world – parties as well as non-parties. ….”

See also the cases of OYETOLA & ANOR v. INEC & ORS (2023) LPELR-60392(SC); and, A.G. ABIA STATE & ORS V. A.G. OF THE FEDERATION (2022) LPELR-57010 (SC).

B. The Dismissal of APC’s Subsequent Appeal and the Finality of the APP Judgement

Following the Federal High Court’s judgement, the All Progressives Congress (APC), which had benefited from the October 2022 elections, appealed the judgement in the case filed by APP. However, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on the 13th of January, 2025, for want of diligent prosecution.

The legal implication of that dismissal is that the FHC’s judgement in the APP case remains the extant and binding position of the law. Under section 287(3) of the 1999 Constitution, all authorities and persons within Nigeria, including government institutions, political parties, and law enforcement agencies are obligated to enforce and abide by the said judgement, the appeal arising therefrom having been dismissed.

The current legal position on the status of the Osun State LGCs following these decisions of both the FHC, Oshogbo, and the Court of Appeal is that the earlier judgment of the FHC, which nullified the local government elections conducted on October 15, 2022, remains binding and validly subsisting. The election conducted by OSSIEC in 2022 therefore stands nullified, while all candidates in that election remain sacked. This will continue to be the position of the law until the judgment is set aside by the apex court of the land at the instance of the APP.

C. The PDP Case and the Court of Appeal’s Technical Dismissal of Same

The PDP had in a separate case similar to APP’s, also challenged the legality of the OSSIEC conducted elections. The FHC sitting in Oshogbo had held in its favour. However, upon appeal, the Court of Appeal sitting at Akure struck it out on technical grounds. The court held that the PDP’s case was premature and speculative, having been filed prematurely when notice of the election had not yet been issued at the time of filing. This, in the intermediate Court’s view, deprived the FHC of jurisdiction to entertain the case. It is respectfully submitted that the Court of Appeal was right as is trite that where a matter is instituted when no cause of action has arisen, the doctrine of ripeness applies and such a matter becomes merely speculative and amounts to an academic exercise. This position of the law was upheld in the cases of EDEVIE V. OROHWEDOR & ORS (2022) LPELR-58931 (SC); OGBIMI V. OLOLO & ORS (1993) LPELR-2280(SC); and, UWAZURUONYE v. GOVERNOR OF IMO STATE & ORS (2012) LPELR-20604(SC).

It must be understood that this judgement did not invalidate the decision earlier obtained by APP at the FHC. Rather, it was a purely procedural decision that had no bearing whatsoever on the substantive matter – the validity or invalidity of the Osun State LG elections. The Court of Appeal held as follows:

“As at the time the PDP brought the suit, the cause of action had not arisen because the notice of election had not been issued. The suit was therefore premature.”

This judgement merely struck out the PDP’s appeal without ruling on the legality or otherwise of the elections. Nor were consequential orders made. More significantly, no declaration or consequential orders were made reinstating the ousted local government officials. When no consequential orders are made in a suit, the status quo remains as contained in the judgement appealed against. See the cases of AKINBOBOLA V. PLISSON FISKO (NIG) LTD & ORS (1991) LPELR-343(SC) and FCDA STAFF MULTI-PURPOSE (COOP) SOCIETY & ORS V. SAMCHI & ANOR (2018) LPELR-444380(CA). The fundamental issues that could have propelled the Court of Appeal to pronounce on the validity or otherwise of the notice of election and the propriety or otherwise of sacking the APC purported elected council officials who had participated in the said election were never considered by the Court of Appeal as they were treated as academic.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS: THE INCONTROVERTIBLE DISSOLUTION OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COUNCILS

1. The 2022 Osun State LG Elections Were Null and Void

By virtue of the APP FHC judgement, the 2022 Osun local government elections were clearly unconstitutional and void from the outset. As a matter of law, a void act confers no legal right. When an act is void, it is void for all times and is not required to be set aside. In the case of OYENEYIN & ANOR V. AKINKUGBE & ANOR (2010) LPELR-2875 (SC), the apex court held that:

“In law, a void act is an act which has no legal effect or consequence. It does not confer any legal right or title whatsoever, and it does not impose any legal obligation or liability on any one or make any party liable to suffer any penalty or disadvantage.”

In simple terms, one cannot put something upon nothing and expect it to stand. It will collapse. See the cases of LEONARD MACFOY V. UAC LIMITED (1962) AC 152; OKWUOSA V. GOMWALK & ORS (2017) LPELR-41736 (SC); IFEANYI V. OGBA & ORS (2022) LPELR-58787(SC); and, MUSTAPHA & ORS V. ADENOPO & ORS (2020) LPELR-51409(CA). Consequently, no political party, individual or group can lay any valid claim to any Osun State local government offices based on the voided election.

2. All Purported Local Government Officials Remain Legally Removed from Office

Since the FHC in the APP case had expressly sacked all persons occupying the local government positions and no appellate court has reversed that judgement, all the said officials remain legally removed from office. The said judgement remains binding on all parties and the whole world until set aside.

Indeed, the Supreme Court had upheld this position of the law in NGERE & ANOR v. OKURUKET & ORS (2014) LPELR-22883(SC), where it held:

“…The judgment of a Court of competent jurisdiction subsists until upset on appeal. While the judgment subsists, every person affected by it or against whom an order is made must obey it even if it appears wrong. Judgments take effect immediately they are delivered and every Court has inherent power to proceed to enforce judgments at once. The enforcements on delivery can only be interrupted by a stay of execution provided there is an appeal.”

3. The Court of Appeal’s Judgement in the PDP Appeal Did Not Reinstate Anyone

Contrary to the position of the sacked LG officials who had sought to forcibly gate-crash into their offices, the Court of Appeal never reinstated any sacked LG officials. It merely struck out the PDP’s case without considering or commenting on the validity or otherwise of the voided elections. Consequently, any claim that the Court of Appeal reinstated the ousted chairmen is a deliberate distortion of facts and a result to sophistry.

4. The APP Judgement Is Binding on All Parties

Since APC’s appeal against the APP FHC judgement was dismissed by the Court of Appeal, that judgement remains final and binding on all political parties, individuals and institutions in Osun State. See the case of NOEKOER V. EXECUTIVE GOVERNOR OF PLATEAU STATE & ORS (2018) LPELR-44350(SC), where the apex court held that:

“it is well settled law that the judgement of a competent court subsists and remains binding until it is set aside on appeal”.

5. Any Attempt to Reoccupy Local Government Offices Is Unconstitutional and Amounts to Self Help

Any action taken by political actors to forcefully invade and reoccupy LG offices as was witnessed few days ago is not only illegal but also constitutes a contemptuous disregard of a valid and subsisting court judgement; and indeed a resort to self help, viet armis. The law forbids such resort to self-help by parties in a pending matter with a view to usurping the functions of a court of law. The Supreme Court in AGBAI & ORS V. OKOGBUE (1991) LPELR-225 (SC) 69-70, F-A, trenchantly cautioned that:

“The ratio decidendi of the decision of this Court in Ojukwu’s case is that once there is lis inter partes and the Courts of law are seised with the dispute, no person or authority, whether parties to the lis or not, is allowed by the Constitution to usurp the functions of the Court of law. It is the duty of every person or authority not to interfere with the legal and judicial process from taking its due course.”

The Supreme Court further confirms this position in NWAKIRE v COP (1992) LPELR-2097 (SC) 42-43, A-D, where it held thus:

“That self-help is not allowed in adjudication has been firmly ensconced in the jurisprudence of this nation like the Rock of Gibraltar, which position remains as constant, in Caesar’s words in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, “as the Northern Star”.

See the causa celere case of MILITARY GOVERNOR OF LAGOS STATE V. OJUKWU & ANOR (1986) LPELR-3186 (SC). See also GARBA V. FCSC (1988) LPELR-1304 (SC) 28-29.

6. The Court of Appeal did not make any consequential Order of Re-instatement of the Sacked LG Officials

It must again be emphasised for the umpteenth time that the Court of Appeal in the PDP appeal decision never validated the election conducted by OSSIEC in 2022 under any guise as the issues on the validity of the election that could have led to a pronouncement on whether or not the APC candidates were rightly sacked were never considered. As a result, there was no consequential order for reinstatement by the Court of Appeal. The only consequential order by the Court of Appeal was an order directing PDP to pay a cost of N250,000 to the Appellants. NO MORE, NO LESS!

CONCLUSION

UPHOLDING THE RULE OF LAW

The Judiciary’s intervention in both the PDP and APP cases rather than show a Judiciary that is complicit, actually underscored the supremacy of the Electoral Act over state laws in regulating local government elections. Under Nigerian legal jurisprudence, the doctrine of “covering the field” applies here, which provides that all state laws which are inconsistent with federal laws are to the extent of those inconsistencies, null and void. In the case of A.G LAGOS STATE V. EKO HOTELS (2017) LPELR-43713(SC), the apex court expounded on the doctrine of covering the field thus:

“If any law enacted by the House of Assembly of a State is inconsistent with any law validly made by the National Assembly, the Law made by the National Assembly will prevail, and that other law shall to the extent of its inconsistency be void” – Section 4(5) CFRN 1999 {As Amended}. This, in clear language, means that only the law validly enacted by the federal legislature will prevail on that which is also validly made by the state house of assembly but this is only where that State Law is inconsistent with that of the Federal law.”

Similarly, in FRIDAY & ORS v. GOV OF ONDO STATE & ANOR (2012) LPELR-7886(CA), the appellate court held thus:

“…It is thus legal and legitimate for both the National Assembly and a State House of Assembly to legislate on same subject matter provided there is no inconsistency from the State law. Where there is inconsistency however, the State law will be declared null and void to the extent of its inconsistency, and in order not to create any vacuum, resort will be had to the old jurisprudential principle of covering the field, that is to say, that since there is a Federal Legislation on the subject matter, it is not necessary for a Federating State to legislate on that area and the provision made by the National Assembly covers the subject matter in question.”

See also the cases of O.S.I.E.C. V. A.C (2010) 19 NWLR (Pt. 1226) 273; NPF & ORS V. POLICE SERVICE COMMISSION (2023) LPELR-60782 (SC); INEC V. MUSA (2003) LPELR-24927 (SC); and, AIRTEL NETWORKS LTD V. AG OF KWARA STATE & ANOR (2014) LPELR-23790 (CA).

All the judgements involved in these cases actually reaffirmed the necessity for electoral bodies to adhere strictly to established legal frameworks, ensuring transparency and compliance in the electoral process. See the cases of AUGUSTINE & ANOR V. INEC & ORS (2024) LPELR-61876(SC) and BUHARI Vs. INEC (2008) 19 NWLR (1120) 246. Such a judgement serves as a significant precedent for future electoral disputes in Nigeria, thus emphasizing the importance of lawful conduct in the governance process. The Court of Appeal in the PDP appeal having struck out the suit without considering the merit of the decision as regards the validity or otherwise of the election conducted by OSSIEC in 2022, the effect is that the suit filed by the PDP never existed in the eyes of the law.

However, the Court of Appeal in the PDP case did not strike down the judgment of the FHC in the APP case, nor did it validate the 2022 LG election and re-instate the sacked LG officials. The FHC’s decision in the APP case thus remains the only definitive legal authority on the status of the 2022 Osun State LG elections. Until and unless the Supreme Court decides otherwise, the said elections remain null, void, and of no effect whatsoever. No person elected in that flawed process can lay any lawful claim to any office.

Any claim to the contrary is a deliberate misinterpretation of the legal position and constitutes an attempt to undermine the rule of law and subvert the judicial process. Such would also serve as a subterfuge to the powers and decisions of arguably the most important arm of government – the Judiciary.

THE COURT’S DECISION IN THE OSUN LG BROUHAHA MUST BE EXECUTED

It is now the duty of law enforcement agencies and government institutions to ensure that all judicial decisions involved in these cases are respected and upheld. It is trite that all persons and authorities must obey judgements of courts and parties are not permitted to pick and choose which judgements to obey, or which to disobey. This legal principle was emphasised in the case of PDP v. LALONG & ORS (2023) LPELR-61629(CA), where the intermediate court held thus:

“By the provision of Section 287 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, all authorities and persons, including this Court, are expected to observe and ensure the compliance of order/judgments of the Court including High Court particularly orders/judgments that are in rem…An order of a competent Court of law, no matter its nature, is absolute and binding on all and sundry without question until it is legally and legitimately set aside by a competent Court of appellate jurisdiction. The fact of its being final or interim does not therefore affect its application and effectiveness. It remains valid and enforceable and must be obeyed”.

See also the cases of NGERE & ANOR v. OKURUKET & ORS (2014) LPELR-22883(SC); SHUGABA V. U.B.N. PLC (1999) LPELR – 3068 (SC); and, OBOH & ANOR V. NFL & ORS (2016) LPELR-50559 (CA).

THE LAW MUST BE VISITED ON THOSE WHO RESORTED TO SELF-HELP

I watched with dismay and disgust the act of certain LG officials who forcefully barged into the LG headquarters, attempting to reclaim office in the false and erroneous belief that the judgment of the Court of Appeal in the PDP case had re-instated them to their official positions, such was nothing short of brigandage and crude resort to self help. It must be condemned in the strongest terms and I so condemn it. It was selfish and uncalled for. In the same vein, all those who aided and abetted this democratic aberration must be fished out and charged before the law courts, however highly placed they are.

ANY AVAILABLE REMEDY?

My above take is not to say that there is no remedy available to the sacked officials; they still have a right of appeal to the Supreme Court in the APP case. But until the Supreme Court overturns the valid and subsisting judgment in rem of the FHC in the APP case, the said judgment remains binding on all parties.

The irresistible conclusion to be drawn from these events is that all LG offices across Osun State remain vacant and that the sacked APC officials cannot lay claim to the benefit of any judgement to occupy the council offices until they obtain a different outcome, if any, from the apex court. This is the LAW.

THE WAY FORWARD

To save themselves from needless orchestrated violence, all the political parties in Osun State should go for fresh polls and test their popularity in a free, fair and credible election. Politicians should leave the Judiciary alone by playing clean politics. As to the title of this piece, my humble submission is that the Judiciary was not in any way complicit in the Osun State LG imbroglio. Rather, it acted in good faith, striving fiercely to defend the rule of law and uphold electoral integrity.