By Sylvester Udemezue
(1). Please what’s wrong with a petition by a candidate against another candidate during NBA electioneering campaigns?
(2). Are petition during NBA elections not similar to preelection lawsuits in traditional electioneering campaigns for general elections? In 2023, as part of preparations for the 2023 elections, NO fewer than *1,800* preelection lawsuits were filed, with each all all seeking to DISQUALIFY either an aspirant or a candidate! See *”NBA TACKLES NATIONAL ASSEMBLY FOR BURDENING 77 JUDGES WITH 1,800 PRE-ELECTION SUITS”* (12 December 2022; premiumtimesng.com)
(3). I am not part of any petition against anyone anytime, and I’ve never written one against anyone. However, let us face truth and the law by speaking as the lawyers that we are: with due respect, *just as with filing preelection lawsuits in traditional political party pre-elections,* filing a petition against a fellow candidate during NBA preelection is not illegal, nor unethical nor unbecoming nor irresponsible nor malevolent. It’s a right which candidates, etc enjoy to ensure the upholding of the law and due process and democracy. It is normal, to ensure compliance with extant laws, guidelines and promote transparency and accountability. It’s not a big deal.
(4). Accordingly, if a candidate files a petition against another, let the Election Umpire offer the person against whom the petition is writen an opportunity of being heard, after which the election umpire should dispassionately examine the petition and the response to it vis-a-vis the facts, the law and the circumstances and finally deliver a verdict accordingly while electioneering campaigns continue. If the petition is meritorious, so be it. If not, dismiss it and let electioneering campaigns continue. Why would anyone be castigated or bullied or maligned merely for exercising his or her legitimate right to demand accountability and the rule of law by writing a petition?
(5). Is it not a stipulation of the NBA Election Guidelines Pursuant to the NBA Constitution, that NBA members, and candidates during electioneering campaigns, should in everything and at all times, and in all cases *FIRST* explore all existing internal mechanisms for dispute resolution and grievance remedial, before resorting to court? So, how can/may ECNBA (the NBA election umpire) be in a position to remedy any perceived grievance or to resolve any live dispute relating to the elections, if the same is not first brought to its attention? How else would a candidate bring to the attention of the ECNBA any perceived grievance or dispute if not by a petition? Why then castigate one who has done the right, legitimate thing, who has only followed due process of law by filing a petition?
(6). What is a “petition”? In the context of NBA elections, a ” Petition” is nothing more than a formal written request to have a legal matter heard and decided by the appropriate authority (in the preelection, the appropriate authority is the ECNBA). The terms petition and complaint are often used interchangeably. The person filing a petition is known as the Plaintiff, or Petitioner or the Complainant, and the responding party is known as the Respondent or Defendant. Most commonly, a petition or complaint is filed when a party feels they have been wronged in some way, and is seeking a redress or when a party wants perceived injustice or a perceived wrong to be corrected.
(7). In my opinion, it’s unreasonable, childish, unprofessional and idiotic for any lawyer to be seen castigating or maligning or insulting a learned colleague on the sole ground that the said learned colleague who is a candidate in an upcoming NBA election, has written a petition against a fellow candidate. Why are we not castigating a candidate who files a preelection lawsuit during electioneering campaigns for inter-political party elections? The truth is that instead of castigating such party candidates, we lawyers are known/used to even taking up such preelection lawsuits on behalf of our clients (who are usually candidates or aspirants in the elections), and representing either the Plaintiffs/claimants or the Defendants.
(8). All the over 1,800 preelection lawsuits in 2023 were filed and prosecuted and defended by lawyers — we lawyers. Yet, when a candidate in an NBA election files a mere petition *(which is the equivalent of preelection lawsuits)*, the same lawyers turn around, for their selfish, parochial reasons, to start insulting, castigating, maligning and trying to intimidate the petitioners. Such a conduct amounts to blowing hot and cold at the same time, giving dissimilar treatments to similar situations, which is a breach of the principle of *Quod Approbo Non Reprobo*.
(9). I repeat that it’s quite irresponsible, absolute-idiotic, and outright unbecoming for a lawyer who has been filing and prosecuting or defending preelection lawsuits in party political campaigns, to be seen castigating a candidate in an NBA election, who has only filed a petition over a matter of law or due process or a perceived breach of guidelines, during NBA electioneering campaigns. Filing a petition, just like filing a preelection lawsuit, is not tantamount to disqualification of the affected candidate against whom the petition is filed. The ECNBA would still look into every petition dispassionately and resolve the same according to law and the election guidelines. In my village, it’s said that it’s not the person who first calls the police, that always wins.
(10). A person who files a petition is a lover of the rule of law, due process and maturity. Which would we prefer?
(a) a candidate filing a petition to call for rule of law and due process or equity or to call attention to perceived grievance; or
(b) a candidate taking the law into his/her hands?
◾TO BE CONTINUED!!!
Respectfully,
Sylvester Udemezue (udems),
Proctor,
The Reality Ministry (TRM),
+234(0)8039136749.
therealityministry@gmail com
(05/July/2024)
