COPIED: Supreme Court Zigzagged Verdicts Justice Or judgment?
- In Rivers, they told us VOTES goes to party NOT the candidate. Thus, rather than allow the runnerup to be sworn in, the apex court allow another aspirant (Rotimi Amaechi) to inherit vote of his party by simply substitute the candidate that participated in the election.
- In Kogi, they told us it’s NOT joint ticket, that deputy (Faleke) can’t inherit vote of his principal (Audu). But they still insisted VOTES goes to party and NOT individual. The process allows party to put forward another candidate (Yahaya Bello)
- In Zamfara, since the supreme court had said VOTES goes to party and NOT the candidate. May be they should have asked the party to organize another primaries to produce candidates since the same court had earlier posited
that vote goes to party and NOT individual. But no, the party lost their votes…
- In Imo, the votes garnered by the candidates is far more than the total vote cast. Yet, Supreme court declared a winner.
Don’t forget similar scenario played out in Rivers where the same apex court posited that there is nothing wrong
in vote cast larger than accredited votes. The court said accreditation by smart device is not known to our law. Thus, Wike is the winner.
- Now in Bayelsa, the same supreme court is telling us it is JOINT TICKET, that whatever happened to either of the two individual would definitely affect others. Wait, would the governor be impeached having being sworn in if his deputy was discovered to have presented fake papers? Yes or No?
But in all, the fault is NOT on supreme court rather our political parties/politicians should be ashamed of themselves. How can a party lack internal mechanism to screen her candidates? Why can’t a party organize hitch free primaries? Why stopped
parties from abiding their own law? Shameful!
Our legislators too must brace up to deepening our democracy by coming up with a comprehensive law rather than rely on supreme court trial and error practice…