The political brawl and electioneering activities in Edo State, which led to the surprising emergence of a seemingly least preferred candidate, came to an anticlimax yesterday November 12, 2024, following the Governor’s swearing-in. This development has sparked widespread dissatisfaction among Edo State residents. The people’s displeasure stems from the sudden switch in outcomes, where the Governor emerged victorious from a distant second position just before the results were announced.
Cemented by this swearing-in are several unresolved issues, perpetuated by existing legal frameworks. Recall that the President of Nigeria was also sworn in within two or three months of being declared the election winner by the electoral authority. The Presidential Election Petition Court addressed three petitions within 180 days, with further Supreme Court appeals resolved within 60 days, resulting in eight months of uncertainty that no sitting would want to entertain, or take lightly!
A little research into why the United States of America’s President-elect is not sworn in immediately or speedily after being elected is quite revealing and helpful. Historically, the need to convey ballots on horseback, allow the electoral authorities to certify the results, and convey them to the capital, was a necessary process. Today, the about 70 days between elections and inaugurations in America serve good purposes.
For instance, this transition period allows the incoming president and cabinet members to retire from their previous roles, settle personal affairs, and prepare for their new responsibilities. Similarly, the outgoing president needs time to prepare for their return to private life. These unfinished tasks justify the transition gap, even in today’s modern era.
In the United States, the President-elect is sworn in on January 20th, following the Electoral College’s vote in December and Congressional certification in early January. This process ensures a smooth transfer of power and allows the incoming administration to prepare for its duties.
In Nigeria, elected officials often use state resources to defend their elections in court or tribunal. They spend months managing the country or the state like sole administrators, juggling public duties with personal ventures. This contributes to poor governance. Ideally, no one should be sworn in until they’ve detached from their former life and been confirmed elected by the tribunals and courts.
While avoiding a governance vacuum is essential, reviewing existing laws is crucial. Elections should conclude at least six months, two weeks, before an incumbent’s tenure ends. Laws (the Constitution) should also set pre-inauguration timelines for President-elects and Governors-elect to form cabinets, sever ties with personal ventures, and personally defend their election victories.
Sections 132 and 178, Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria stipulate that elections for the office of President or Governor must be held between 150 and 120 days before the expiration of the incumbent’s term. Previously, this provision had been revised from a window of 60 to 30 days. This column focuses on executive positions at the national and state levels, but similar legal reforms aimed at ensuring adequate closure periods could be extended to the legislature.
A further expansion of the election timeline to ensure Presidential and Gubernatorial elections are concluded no later than 200 days before swearing-in wouldn’t be a bad idea. However, this may still prove futile without complementary amendments to ensure no unfinished business remains before swearing-in, particularly the conclusion of election petitions. Achieving this requires thorough reforms of Nigeria’s electoral laws, laws of evidence, and election petition procedures to promote fairness, inquisitorial trials, and justice for both contestants and electorates.
Finally, Nigeria needs to revisit the immunity clause issue, especially for outgoing leaders. I strongly urge that at least 200 days before their exit, all executive public office holders and deputies should have mandatory sessions with ethics, drug, and law enforcement agencies. This ensures agency independence and prevents politicians from exploiting power. Those not cleared by these agencies should face trial or sanctions upon handover. No politician wants to be escorted from office to the dock.
Q & A – The Lawyer’s Feedback
Hi Barrister. Please my neighbourhood is a suburb of mixed urban and rural communities. When my dad was acquiring the land, he insisted on a residential plot and was was given a title documents to suggest so. Recently however, we noticed some clearing work going on on the plot next to ours and we were excited thatca new neighbour was coming to develop. Only last month, that plot has been designed into a poultry farm and the stench that brings to our compound is unbearable. Please advise on what to do?
Hello, friend.
Thanks for sending in your question, and sorry for the trouble you’re experiencing.
Based on your description, here are some key points to consider:
1. Preliminary evaluation suggests a potential case of private nuisance, which may escalate to public nuisance in the future.
2. A substantial body of legal knowledge supports the notion that foul odors can constitute private nuisance when they interfere with a neighbor’s quiet enjoyment of their property.
3. Your father made a wise decision ensuring the plot he acquired was zoned for residential use. To confirm, visit the Urban or Regional Planning Office to verify that your plot remains residential in the neighborhood’s master plan.
4. Additionally, confirm the purpose of the neighboring plot to ensure it wasn’t allocated for farmland or commercial use, which is unlikely if yours is residential.
5. If your farming neighbor has unofficially changed the use of a residential plot, you can maintain a case against them.
6. However, if approved to run a poultry farm, consider contacting environmental protection agencies for intervention or writing to the lands department to request relocation, citing your existing structures and priority in time.
7. If the entire layout has been redesigned for farming or commercial use, you may need to explore relocation and compensation options, as future nuisance incidents are possible.
Best regards.
Yours truly, JD
Readers and followers are advised to keep the questions coming and don’t be discouraged if I am yet to pick and answer yours. The questions are picked randomly. So keep sending them in through all of my official channels of communication as disclosedin this column (jdaniel.nig@gmail.com; twitter – x.com/Attorney_ng or search @attorney_ng, and Whatsapp +234 802 746 2264).
Did you know that…
You can now swear to an affidavit and execute other legal documents from anywhere in the world electronically? Yes! The COVID-19 lockdown experience ushered a couple of practice direction that made our courts in Nigeria began to tick in that direction.
You may still recall that hot debate that the Verifying Affidavit signed by the President in support of his nomination documents for election was invalid, as he was not in Abuja the date the affidavit was allegedly signed. While the Courts ‘miraculously’ did not consider the implication of that on the President’s nomination, the truth is that, if that repeats itself today, it wouldn’t be an issue again.
The Senate and the House of Representatives on May 17, 2023 and December 22, 2023 respectively passed the Evidence (Amendment) Act, 2023. Interestingly same was assented by the current President on June 11, 2023. Section 6 of this amendment law, altered Section 109, Evidence Act, 2011 and allows for making of an affidavit “in person or through audio-visual means”, while Section 93, Evidence Act, 2011 was also altered to accommodate not just electronic, but also digital signatures.