.Federal High Court sitting in Lagos, southwest Nigeria,
on Monday, restrained the President Goodluck Jonathan-
led Federal Government from deploying the military to
supervise the coming general elections.
The presiding Judge, Justice Ibrahim Buba, in his ruling,
declared that it is unconstitutional to deploy military for the
supervision of election without the approval of the National
Assembly.
Nigerian soldiers on patrol in Maiduguri
The ruling of the court, was sequel to a suit filed by Femi
Gbajabiamila, a member of the House of Representatives
representing Surulere Federal Constituency 2 under the platform
of All Progressives Congress, APC against President Goodluck
Jonathan, Chief of Defence Staff, Chief Of Army Staff, Chief of Air
Staff, Chief of Naval Staff and the Attorney General of the
Federation.
In his argument, Seni Adio, lawyer to the plaintiff, argued that
there was an allegation and evidence that the military inhibited
free movement, free access and intimidation of voters in of
Osun, Ekiti, and Anambra where the military were deployed
during the governorship elections in those states.
In addition, Adio argued further that it is not ideal to deploy the
military to supervise election in a democratic setting.
Consequently, considering what happened in Osun and Ekiti in
2014 and Anambra in November, 2013, he urges the court to
restrain the defendants from using the military in the coming
elections.
Mr. Dele Adeshina, SAN, opposed the application on the ground
that the President being the Commander-In-Chief of the Armed
Forces, is empowered under Armed Forces Act to deploy the
military to maintain law and order.
In his response, Adio said the Armed Forces Act is subordinate
to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Monday’s ruling tallies with that of the Federal High Court in
Sokoto, Northwest Nigeria, which had on Thursday, 29 January,
2015, outlawed the use of the military for election duty across
Nigeria.
The court ruled on the lingering controversy and declared the
use of soldiers as unconstitutional.
Justice Mohammed Rilwan Aikawa ruled that other than for the
purposes of protecting the nation’s territorial integrity, no
constitutional provision allows for the deployment of the
military for elections.
The suit challenging the deployment of military for election
duties was instituted by the Deputy Speaker of the House of
Assembly, Bello Goronyo, representing Goronyo Constituency in
Sokoto State.
Justice Rilwan added that for the Federal Government to do so,
it must have taken recourse to the National Assembly, which
would enact such law.
The presidential candidate of the opposition All Progressives
Congress, APC, General Muhammadu Buhari had early in
January warned President Goodluck Jonathan against further
deployment of soldiers to cities and towns during elections.
He said that the soldiers were meant to defend the territorial
integrity of the country and not for policing elections.
Whereas few military men have been deployed to tackle
insurgents in the north east, he said a large number were
deployed to monitor elections.
Also, in its February 16 letter, APC drew Jonathan’s and the
INEC’s attention to the January 29 judgment of Justice R.M.
Aikawa of the Federal High Court, Sokoto and the February 16
decision of the Court of Appeal, Abuja, which outlawed the
President’s unilateral deployment of soldiers for the June 21,
2014 Ekiti State governorship election. It urged them to obey
both decisions.
In the letter signed by the Director, Legal, APC Presidential
Campaign Council, Chukwuma-Machukwu Ume (SAN), the party
argued that by virtue of both decisions, it had become illegal
for the President and INEC to involve members of the armed
forces in electoral matters without the National Assembly’s
permission.
Justice Aikawa restrained the President and INEC “from
engaging the service of the Nigerian Armed Forces in the
security supervision of elections in any manner whatsoever in
any part of Nigeria, without an Act of the National Assembly.”
Justice Abdul Aboki , in his lead judgment in the Ekiti State
Governorship Election appeal delivered on February 16, held
that “even the President of Nigeria has no powers to call on the
Nigerian Armed Forces and to unleash them on peaceful
citizens, who are exercising their franchise to elect their
leaders.
“Whoever unleashed soldiers on Ekiti State disturbed the peace
of the election on June 21, 2014; acted in flagrant breach of the
Constitution and flouted the provisions of the Electoral Act,
which required an enabling environment by civil authorities in
the conduct of elections.”
Section 215 of the 1999 Constitution makes the maintenance of
internal security, including law and order during elections, the
exclusive responsibility of the police.
According to Lagos lawyer Mr Femi Falana (SAN), it is
erroneous for Prof Jega to say that only the military could
guarantee security during the elections.
To him, once INEC has discharged its constitutional duty of
fixing election dates, the onus is on the police to provide
security and maintain law and order.
Falana recalled that the courts have consistently enjoined the
Federal Government to desist from involving the armed forces in
elections.
He cited the leading judgment of the Court of Appeal in Yussuf
v Obasanjo (2005) 18 NWLR (PT 956) 96, which the court held:
“It is up to the police to protect our nascent democracy and not
the military, otherwise the democracy might be wittingly or
unwittingly militarized. This is not what the citizenry bargained
for in wrestling power from the military in 1999. Conscious step
or steps should be taken to civilianize the polity to ensure the
survival and sustenance of democracy.”
The court, Falana said, reiterated its views in the case of Buhari
v Obasanjo (2005) 1 WRN 1 at 200 when it stated: “In spite of
the non-tolerant nature and behavior of our political class in
this country, we should by all means try to keep armed
personnel of whatever status or nature from being part and
parcel of our election process. The civilian authorities should
be left to conduct and carry out fully the electoral processes at
all levels.”
Upholding the judgment, the Supreme Court stated in Buhari v
Obasanjo (2005) 50 WRN 1 at 313 that the state is obligated to
ensure that “citizens who are sovereign can exercise their
franchise freely, unmolested and undisturbed.”
Falana said going by the verdicts, Prof Jega should ensure that
INEC is not further blackmailed by the military hierarchy.
“On their own part, the National Security Adviser (NSA) and the
Service Chiefs should desist from usurping the constitutional
responsibility of the INEC and the Nigeria Police Force,” Falana
added.