Oshiomole Canvasses Stopping Court From Awarding Election Victory
TITUS ALLI, Abuja
Following the loss of the All Progressive Congress (APC) at the Supreme Court, its national chairman, Adams Oshiomhole Tuesday canvassed that an amendment is proposed to the Electoral Act to strip courts of powers to award victory to any other candidate, other than the one elected by the people.
He said such amendment will seek to only empower the courts to allow for a re- run election rather than award victory to a different person
Oshiomhole, still irked by the Supreme Court ruling voiding the election of David Lyon, the party’s candidates, stated the apex Court judgement is “ unpardonable” after a meeting with President Muhammadu Buhari.
Speaking further on the disqualification of the Bayelsa governorship running mate, Biobarakuma Degi-Eremieoyo, Oshiomhole absolved the party of any wrong-doing saying that “ running mates are not usually subjected to screening by the party’s screening committee”
“ It is the responsibilities of the candidates and the local committees to screen the running mates of the governorship candidates, not those of the national committees set up by the party”
“That cannot be the reason why a man who was rejected by the electorate would be imposed on the electorate. The court should not impose’, he said.
“If the court finds out that the preferred candidate has faults, for me the only democratic and legal option is to repeat the exercise. Nothing should empower the court to impose a man rejected by the people, on the people.
“That goes to the heart of democracy and it destroys the fabric of our democratic process.
“So, in amending the Electoral Act, one of the things I’ll like to see the Parliament do and we are going to make a representation, is that in the unlikely event that the people have voted in good faith, for a candidate that was validly put before them by INEC, if anybody has any issue with that one that the people prefer and has won, the court cannot impose the person that was rejected.
“The very best the court can do is to order that the exercise be repeated because in a democracy, nobody, other than the people, can choose who governs them, not the courts.
“Now, the man in Bayelsa is going to govern a state that did not mandate him, purely on technical grounds. Nations are not governed by technicalities, they are governed by people popularly elected. That is the democracy we chose.
This is not a partisan issue at all, it’s about democracy. The court cannot impose losers as winners, for me it’s too fundamental.
He disclosed that the party will take advantage of the impending amendment to the electoral act to “make it impossible for anyone to be so imposed on the basis of technicalities.”
“For me, this is fundamental when it comes to who actually won the election. The issue of whether Muhammed, Muhammadu or Momoh, whether they are one and the same person is too technical for the real electorate to bother about when there are no two people parading themselves as to suggest whether there’s a case of impersonation. This system should not be derailed by technicalities.
“At the heart of every judicial pronouncement on elections must be who actually won the majority of lawful votes and if for any reason they found themselves compelled to nullify that person, they should not be empowered to award governorship to a man rejected by the electorate, otherwise, what is democracy about?”
Speaking also on the Tuesday ruling of the apex court on the review sought by the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the Imo state gubernatorial election, Emeka Ihedioha, Oshiomhole said it was refreshing and predictable given the attitude of the country on the Bayelsa case.
“I think is refreshing and quite predictable in the sense that from the attitude of the Supreme Court last week on Bayelsa that nothing was wrong with the candidate,” he said.
Oshiomhole also rejected views that the total notes tally for Uzodinma exceeded the number for accredited voters in the election, saying that “ such assertion had not been proved”
He said: “You have made an assumption which is not supported by fact, mainly by the speculation and the roadside talks by some elements in PDP, suggesting that there was over-voting i you add the votes that were ignored.
“Those are not proven because if they were, it was up to their counsel to provide evidence that it was more than the registered voters, not to go and sit on television.
“Matters before the court are canvassed before the court. Issues not raised in the court cannot be raised on television. I assume your question is informed by those uninformed, self-serving speculations. They don’t merit my reaction.
“We can do a rerun 10 times, but only the man popularly elected can govern. Otherwise, in a democracy, as they say, the people deserve the government that they have.
In this case, you are going to have a government you didn’t vote for superintending over your resources and presiding over your life.
Comments are closed.