In this interview with Solomon Odeniyi, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN speaks on the decision of the presidential tribunal justices on the transmission of results among other issues.

What do you make of the judgments of the tribunal of the petitions seeking to remove the president?

I think that the issues decided by the justices have fairly been foretold by the apex court on the issues of nomination, the validity of nomination, and the issue of the status of the Federal Capital Territory among others. These are matters that within the legal profession we knew were already decided in a way that the justices came down yesterday. To a large extent, the judgment of the presidential election petition court was not surprising to us who have been watching the proceedings.

Does it mean you agree with all the declarations of the justices?

My concern is the decision of the justices concerning the conduct of the Independent National Electrical Commission. I thought that the judges had an opportunity to help INEC strengthen our democracy. If a body which is given power by law says that it wants to conduct elections electronically and failed to do so and didn’t advance any cogent reason before the court on why it did not do so, I didn’t think it was proper for the justices to endorse or ratify that conduct. By saying that INEC is not bound to transmit elections electronically we have gone back to the days of manipulation.

We have gone to the days of electoral lawlessness. I thought that the justices would have used that opportunity to at least chastise INEC.

All the reforms we have campaigned for and gained through the electoral act that was amended before Buhari left have been rubbished by this judgment. Everything we gained in the 2022 electoral act has been reversed. I’m not saying the justices were not right in dismissing the petitions, but to have remained silent about the conduct of INEC and to have endorsed the obvious lapses that INEC committed despite the huge fund, was a disservice to the electoral system. I am hoping that the Supreme Court will take time to correct that. Other than that, I cannot fault the Lordships’ decisions on the petitions.

But the petitioners failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the elections were marred by irregularities, are you saying the justices should have gone ahead to rule on what was not proved?

I generally think that the lawyers for the Labour Party and PDP will go back to the drawing board. But there’s no effort or amount of industry that the lawyers could have put in to overturn that election because the burden on them was too high to prove.

For you to claim that an election was not properly held you have to trace the exercise to every ward and polling unit and INEC was not cooperating. You will recall the dramas that played out in getting the certified true copies of the results. It is a difficult thing in our law in Nigeria for you to overturn an election, especially a presidential election.

We senior lawyers knew from day one that these petitions would end the way they did. The judgment was not surprising to us at all. It is true that maybe the lawyers of the petitioners could have done better, especially with the kind of witnesses they produced. When you have a case where 10 witnesses were being disqualified, then maybe they could have done better in those areas.

Don’t you think anyone challenging an election outcome shouldn’t rely solely on INEC who is also a defendant for their evidence? 

No, I think that it’s a difficult thing for a petitioner to rely on any evidence other than the one given by the body that conducted the election.

But they are also a defendant in the petition, aren’t they?

See, if you bring your evidence of results collated by agents you will have to prove that the results are correct because INEC is the one recognized by law to conduct elections. When you bring foreign materials or foreign evidence, that is different from the one supplied by INEC, the courts may still throw them out. I think it’s a reason for us who are advocating that the burden should be on INEC to show that they conducted the election properly and not petitioners to show that the election was not properly conducted. So long as the burden is on the petitioners, INEC will always run away with this technical victory.

What I am trying to say is that it is INEC that has the materials used for the conduct of an election. They have the documents, they have everything. So, it is for INEC to come and show that they have conducted the election properly and not for the petitioners to come and show that the election was not properly conducted because they will be handicapped without materials and pieces of evidence.

So, looking at the judgments now, do you think the petitioners stand a chance at the apex court based on some of the witnesses and pieces of evidence that had been knocked out at the tribunal?

Well, I think that from what the justices read out yesterday, the facts of the case were irrelevant to the fate of the two petitions.

This means they should have isolated the points of law and submitted them to the justices for determination, which means that those petitions would have been determined even before the winner was sworn in.

As it were, the evidence of Labor Party and PDP were irrelevant to the decisions of the justices. Those pieces of evidence were either thrown out or they were not found credible. It’s a lesson that maybe in future petitions like this; you could just isolate the legal points. If somebody wins in another state and doesn’t win in FCT, can he be declared President? If somebody has a criminal record as it were, can he be declared President? If somebody has a passport of two nations, can he be declared President? If somebody was nominated and nominated by another party, those legal issues could have determined the petition. All of us would have been at home without the tension generated, and all the blackmail on the judiciary which were unnecessary would not have emerged. Because of this, we don’t expect that the Supreme Court will do any different thing because the decisions relied on by the justices were the decisions of the Supreme Court particularly the one for the Vice President which was determined in May. Based on the position of the law as it were, it’s going to be an uphill task to upturn that judgment.

What would be your advice to the petitioners and counsels?

My advice is not just to the petitioners but to the lawyers, and to all lovers of democracy to focus on INEC. The proper institution to help us midwife and drive democracy properly is the electoral body.

INEC should be unbundled. There are too many things being done by the body together. Also, we must make INEC independent. There is no reason a president who is interested in an election should be the one to appoint the chairman of the body. We should remove INEC from the presidency, by that; we would free INEC from politicians. In that way, they would work without fear or intimidation from any quarter.

Punch

President of the Students’ Union Government at Rivers State University, Port Harcourt, Anele Miracle, who was seen in a viral photo with bodyguards, tells DENNIS NAKU, why he chose to arm himself with security details and over 12 other aides, among other issues

When were you elected as SUG President at Rivers State University?

My name is Anele Miracle, the President of the Students’ Union Government at Rivers State University. I am a 300-level student in the Department of Sociology, Faculty of Social Sciences. I was elected on October 14, 2022, and inaugurated on January 30, 2023.

How would you describe the electioneering and outcome of the election that brought you into office as SUG leader?

So, my election was such that the students’ community got so much involved in it. Over time, the students’ community felt that the process of electing their leaders was not solely in their hands. So, for them to change the narrative, the election took a different turn, by getting a lot of them involved. The students were the ones who picked me, who took over the elections, and the campaign process. On the day of the election, they came out en masse as against the normal routine of the electioneering period. In fact, my election had a significant number of votes as against the past elections held in the institution. I won with a margin of over 1,000 votes. I had over 2,700 votes, while my opponent had 1,500 votes. The other one had 500 votes and all that. So, in the past SUG elections, the position of President was such a competitive one, that the margin one could only win with could just be 100 to 300 votes.

How did your opponents react to your emergence?

It was very evident to everybody and apparently, they knew that the students wanted me. So, without any sentiment, they had to embrace the outcome. Some of them came to me seeking to work together, and we are working together, while some of them – you know nobody likes failure – decided to go back to their shells and continue their normal lives.

Have you reached out to the disgruntled ones?

Yes, I believe that my position is just an interim one. It is just for one year, and there is life after school. So, not winning today doesn’t make them a failure. Of course, I have reached out to them and opined that they should work with me to achieve their aspirations. For them to have contested, they must have visions for the students which can be realised through my administration. So, yes, I gave them that inclusiveness.

You were seen in a viral photo recently, surrounded by armed bodyguards. Can you explain what it was all about?

They are not armed bodyguards. They are normal students. You know the position of the office of the President is accompanied by a lot of respect and dignity. So for me, I decided to add more value to the office just to make sure that the beauty of the office comes out. And they (bodyguards) are normal students, members of the Man O’ War. So, the only thing we do is just to make sure that we kit them up to look more respectable and more valued. They are just for occasions, you know. You saw me working around, and I don’t think you saw me walking with anybody or people gathered around me.

How did you hire them to work with you?

No, they are normal students and Man O’ War officials assigned to work with me.

Who assigned them to work with you?

The management. The moment you’re elected as the SUG President, you have the privilege to work with Man O’ War officers because the office is such a sensitive one. So to avoid harassment, embarrassment and all that. For me, I just added value to it by making sure I kit them up,and it looks like they’re were hired from outside. No, they were not. They are students and members of the community.

How did you kit them up?

It’s just by getting their security outfits. If you saw the pictures on the Internet, you would have seen them wearing kits for bouncers. One of them wore a suit. They are not armed at all, the management will not allow that. I’m still a student aside from the position, so why would I go about with armed security? Although, there was an occasion I was harassed sometime ago. Aside from that, I have not received any issue of harassment from any student or anybody. So, why would I arm the security (aides) working with me?

On what occasion were you harassed and where?

Oh, that was the day of the town hall meeting with a former governor, Nyesom Wike, at the Obi Wali International Conference Centre, Port Harcourt. Some cultists came up with the notion that some dollars were given to the SUG president, so they stampeded me with some other SUG presidents. Even some of our guys were stabbed and all that. So, my security aides helped me to escape the scenario and rescued some of our colleagues. So, that was the benefit of having them around me.

The kind of security aides you have suggests that your life is not safe. Are there issues of insecurity or cultism at RSU that raise concerns and bother you?

To be very frank with you, the issue of cultism and insecurity in the Rivers State Union has been addressed a long time ago before I emerged as the president. This university, some years, say five years ago or so, was noted to be a school where cult activities were recorded. But in recent times, the vice-chancellor, chief security officer and other management staff with the support of the Students’ Union Government have been able to tackle that issue. So, we cannot say that we have any issue of insecurity. The little ones that could be found daily are minor issues that are addressed by the chief security officer and with my support and my team. So I must say that there has been peace in the school.

How many security aides do you have?

They are just two as you may have seen in the picture. My chief security officer and my aide-de-camp.

How much do you pay them as aides, considering the risk involved?

No, I don’t pay them. We are all working for the students’ community. Nobody pays me; it’s community service, if you ask me. It’s a privilege for me to serve, and maybe a little allowance can come to the office of the president. They are recognised by the management of the university, but they work with me, and from time to time, they could be given incentives. But the management doesn’t pay me or anybody. It is something we pledged to do as a service to the community. So, why would they pay us for it?

Aside from the CSO and ADC, how many other aides do you have?

The SUG constitution allows me to make five appointments. The CSO, the chief press secretary, the personal assistant, the attorney general and the chief of staff. However, the president is at liberty to make other appointments. So, what I have is my social capital project committee, which comprises one person per faculty. We have 12 faculties, so I have 12 representatives that could serve as liaison officers between the SUG and faculties.

I also have my committee members for programmes; whenever I’m organising programmes, there is a directorate for programmes. Then I have the directorate for projects because there are things I want to achieve and these people help me to do the planning and execution of the projects. Aside from that, I don’t have any other. I have a head of media and communication who works under the CPS and is very important.

With your retinue, are you not concerned that other students may see your lifestyle as extravagant and a waste of levies paid by RSU students to fund the SUG?

First off, everything we do is based on transparency and accountability. The university is very much concerned about the management of the funds given to us. So, for you to be given any money, you must account for it and there should be something very convincing that you did with the money. So, we don’t have direct access to the money, the management will not allow us to take money that we are not going to use for the benefit of the students. So, I’m not living an extravagant life.

I try my best to communicate my intentions in a very light and subtle way to the management and the community. And my video or picture seen on the Internet was not funded by anybody. It is something we chose to do for ourselves. The only thing we tried to magnify was to make it look as though we hire them (security aides) or we pay them. Everybody has their style of leadership. So for me, I try to make it more presentable and more valuable.

How would you describe the relationship between the SUG and the management of the university?

Well, the Students’ Union Government cannot work independently. We are a middle body between the management and the students’ community. So for you to succeed as a body, you must make sure you have a very cordial relationship with the management and also ensure your relationship with the management doesn’t affect your constituents.

It was reported recently that some government universities increased their tuition. What is the situation at RSU?

The vice-chancellor and the management are very compassionate about the welfare of the students. So, it has not considered that (increasing the school fees) and I pray it doesn’t even think of introducing any increment because it knows that it is not favourable to us as students. So, the management has not informed me of any intention to increase the fees, and I believe it won’t have such an intention.

If that happens, how would you handle it?

If that happens, I will have to consult my colleagues.Sometime last year, the university banned indecent dressing, a decision that sparked a protest.

How did you handle the situation? 

Well, you cannot outgrow the management of the institution and I believe whatever decision they are making is in the best interest of the students. You see the reason RSU is prestigious is because you are not only certified in your field of study, you’re also found worthy in character. So indecent dressing is not part of moral behaviour and we have to condemn it in its entirety. The management wants to make sure students are trained to be recognised anywhere they find themselves in the world and excel in anything they do. Yes, the issue of indecent dressing sparked a lot of reactions. Yes, the management did it because we were very deliberate about the progress of the school and the students but as time went on, we kept communicating to them (female students) that the management meant well for us. Most of them have complied and things are going on smoothly. The few deviants are being tackled accordingly.

What are the major problems affecting RSU students and what suggestions would you give to solve them?

Well, the problems we have here as students are not different from what affects every normal student out there in other higher institutions. Students are complaining about the hike in the cost of transportation and the bad economy affecting the cost of living on campus because the moment the economy is not favourable down to the grassroots, everybody feels the consequences. Another thing is that we need more infrastructure. Some of our classrooms are overcrowded because RSU is a first-choice university in Nigeria. So, we are appealing to the management and the state government to help us with infrastructure. Of course, the Rivers State Government is doing very well, but we need more in that regard. We need more accommodation. It is affecting us. Again, we need a sports complex. We don’t have a place for sporting activities as part of our extracurricular activities. I have received a myriad of complaints from students over their dissatisfaction with the fact that there is no provisional for that.

Punch

Debo Ranti Ajayi was the Young Progressives Party (YPP) candidate in the 2022 gubernatorial election in Ekiti State.

In this exclusive interview with Iniobong Iwok, he spoke on the state of the nation, assessing the President Bola Tinubu’s administration.

Are you still in YPP or are you back in APC?

I am still in YPP, I joined the YPP on the basis of the manifesto of YPP and the need to have a clean platform that matches my own convictions of what it would take to move Nigeria forward.

There have been a lot of people putting pressure on me to return to APC, but I am still watching to see if the emergence of President Bola Tinubu would bring positive change in APC.

Buhari’s poor governance and the kind of leadership APC had in Ekiti State were factors that made me exit APC at that time. Considering the policies and the handling of internal party affairs, I could not see myself actualise my vision on that platform.

Things could change under the leadership of President Tinubu but as it is now I have no reason to leave YPP. I made a commitment to YPP and as long as YPP is committed to its manifesto and as long as the leadership of YPP show seriousness in providing leadership in Nigeria they can always count on my loyalty.

There are issues here and there within YPP, but they are not fundamental enough for me to want to leave the party.

You were formerly in APC, talking about APC are you surprised with the manner Adullahi Adamu resigned from his position as chairman of the party?

I am not surprised. Seeing how President Bola Tinubu emerged first to be the candidate of APC and winning the presidential election, it is obvious that there were internal gang-ups against him all the way. Now that he emerged it is not surprising that he would want to address those elements within the party who were not supportive and who could undermine his leadership.

I hope there is no other ulterior motive behind this action than to just make sure that there is internal cleansing and ordering of the affairs of APC.

Frankly, if you are a captain of an army, you would not want dissidents among your group, you would want your team to be driving in the same direction. But let it not be that this is to pave way for any particular power bloc. It is always healthy to allow for internal disagreements and resolutions. But it is fundamentally wrong to have people working against the candidate of the party.

You would notice that President Bola Tinubu campaigned as if he was in opposition to the ruling party at that time. It was enough evidence that there were serious power blocs in the party against him. In fact the emergence of Ashiwaju Tinubu as president is a miracle.

The operations of these saboteurs or anti-party individuals were obvious. I am sure he would have known the faces behind those activities to sabotage his ambition.

So, I am not surprised at all, with what is happening, but as I said, let it not go to the extent that they are trying to kill healthy opposition within the party. One can learn a lot from one’s enemy if one is wise.

It should not be expected that everybody in the party would have the same views all the time. That will not be realistic.

One of the problems of former President Muhammadu Buhari was that he was not proactive and hands-on enough. Early in his term, he said that he did not care who would be the President of the senate. If he really wanted to fight corruption he would have realised that he needed the National Assembly leadership beside him. The enactment of necessary laws to support that mission would require cooperation of the National Assembly.

What is your take on the performance of Abiodun Oyebanji, Governor of Ekiti State?

The reports about him have been very positive at least by the people on ground and generally speaking, the average person has been impressed with him resulting from his adoption of some populist policies, and his reaching out to the leaders, elders and opinion leaders in the state.

In terms of a substantial program we are yet to see anything. He has tried to repair some roads but they are patches that don’t last.

Ekiti State, being a civil service state, will hail a governor that is paying salaries and keeping pensioners happy. They don’t really care how you are getting the money.

It is a question that the government may need to answer as to where he is getting the money from. It is hoped that it is not a case of further indebtedness to pay salaries. We are yet to see any concrete economic development.

But then, he is yet to form his cabinet. We recently saw some list of commissioner nominees. Maybe when they are inaugurated, we can see more happening. Generally, nothing concrete on ground for us to consider as economic development and wellbeing of the state.

What is your take on the conduct of the presidential poll by INEC?

INEC over-promised and under-delivered, through the so-called BVAS and IREC. We went through the same BVAS and IREV in Ekiti State and we saw the ineffectiveness of those electronic systems. We saw how human interventions often render those electronic systems ineffective.

If this can happen in Ekiti and Osun governorship elections, it was clear to us that INEC making so much noise about it for the general elections was not going to happen. The way they described it was all hypothetical narratives. We knew all the promises on how that system was going to work were not going to happen.

I knew that INEC cannot deliver on the expectations it was setting for the general elections and behold that was how it turned out.

I think in Nigeria, INEC should be required to do adequate test runs of any new system before they are used. It should be a requirement for INEC to provide evidence before the approving authorities give the go-ahead on the implementation of innovative systems.

Are you saying BVAS failed in Ekiti gubernatorial election last year?

Of course, BVAS failed in Ekiti State gubernatorial election last year. Across the state it was only useful in the identification of voters. When you talk about electronic transmission of results, it failed woefully. It was good for identification of the fingerprint of voters and that was where it ended. Transmission of results into the central database in real time did not happen in last year’s Ekiti gubernatorial election.

But we saw the transmission of the National Assembly election results in several states using that?

The Senate and House of Representatives were state based elections. The success of that transmission was not everywhere in Nigeria. It may have been a success in some places. I am trying to say that in Nigeria, we innovate without adequate testing and verification. Often, we are too eager to get on something new without adequate assessment of human and physical infrastructural implications.

Some people said it was a predetermined arrangement by INEC. Do you agree?

I seriously doubt that it was. The reality is that with the best system in the hands of Nigerians, things will not work as expected because people operate these systems.

People are in charge of this equipment, so you would always have the human and Nigerian factors affect a good system to produce controversial outcomes, I think it is time to overhaul the manpower of INEC.

Many times, we think politicians are the corrupt ones, but in reality the civil servants are more corrupt. This is not to say that all of them are like that, but it is a safe generalisation.

These long-serving INEC officers are the people responsible for election results not to reflect the wishes of the people. Many times, people focus on the INEC Chairman, but we forget that the Chairman roles are very limited. It is the INEC officers at state and local government levels across the country that perform the key jobs and aid rigging. The sum total of results therefore reflect such activities at those levels.

What is your view on President Tinubu’s economic reforms so far?

Time is short to give a good assessment. However, I see that the government has a lot to do in the area of carrying the people along. They must do more in the area of communication because there have been a lot of shocks to the people that could be better managed.

The removal of fuel subsidy even though it was on the agenda of the main contenders in the presidential election, and we commend the President for the courage of leadership on the issue, but we see there is not much pre-planned follow-up actions on how to manage the effect of the removal of petrol subsidy.

It may be because the federal cabinet is not yet in place. There is no institutional leadership to manage the introduction of such major policies. Therefore, one would give the President the benefit of doubt. But, there are still saboteurs in the system right now. For example, I expect the currency situation to be different from what it is now.

There are still elements in Nigeria trying to make sure that this new government fails even before it starts. The government needs to carry the people along and communicate effectively with the people about policies.

Are you optimistic the presidential election petition tribunal can rule in favour of any of the opposition candidates?

I don’t expect that anything in terms of overturning the presidential election is going to happen at the end of the day. Is that justice? Is that not justice? You can expect divergent opinions on that. Invariably, justice would still be determined by the judiciary as far as that goes.

But I don’t expect that the judiciary would overturn what INEC has declared. Part of the reason may be that the Judiciary doesn’t want to create a real crisis in their decision. Frankly speaking, everybody rigged. The view that it was only the winner that rigged is not correct. People rigged in their local strongholds, otherwise the winner would not have scored 1/3rd of the votes cast. it would have been a lot more than that.

When you talk about justice you must come with a clean hand and none of them have clean hands. How the tribunal is going to give judgement without creating a crisis is not one that I can get into.

If the result is overturned, would that not create a constitutional crisis? What would be the interim arrangement while preparation is made for another election? Do you imagine the cost of another presidential election?

We have adopted democracy in Nigeria, but I don’t think we are ready to pay the price of democracy.

The kind of presidential democracy we have is expensive. And, another election can’t happen in less than another six months time.

I suppose these would be some of the considerations the tribunal will look at. But, one thing I expect to come out of this is a call for a total review of INEC, especially the manpower.

Business Day