Dr. Tunji Abayomi, lawyer and rights activist, was a leading counsel in the last round of election petition tribunals in Ondo State. He spoke to NIYI BELLO in Akure, about his expectations from the tribunals in their handling of petitions arising from the 2011 polls.WITH the universal accolade trailing the conduct of this years election, do you still think there is need for litigationThe efforts made to conduct free and fair elections this time is commendable and a lot of people have commended the process. But as a participant in the process, I know the 2011 General Election was largely free but not entirely fair. There are causes for questioning a whole lot of results.Many of the results declared couldnt stand legal scrutiny because of the activities of some politicians, who were bent on sabotaging the entire process. So, the process of litigation, as enshrined in the Electoral Law, must continue until we are close to perfection in electioneering, which is the main pillar of participatory democracy. I hope that as we continue in this journey towards perfecting our democratic system, we will be improving on our conduct of elections and the judicial process will help us identify the flaws to be corrected. What do you expect from the election tribunals this time aroundMy expectation is that we would have fewer cases before the tribunals because of the level of transparency that was better than the 2007 polls. Consequently, a neater and better job, free from political and money influence, should be expected.However, secluding the tribunals from the government in power, especially when such government is a defendant, remains an important key to the impartiality of the tribunals. We have seen in the past how defendants in power used state power and resources to cripple the plaintiffs. This is not good enough.We must use everything possible to shield the tribunals from the influence of officials of government in power. This can be done, by insulating the process from official influence as much as possible. It is only through that that we can secure the confidence of the judiciary.With the background of allegations of corruption against the Bench, how can we secure that much-needed confidence in the judiciaryThe greatest source of corruption in Nigeria is the government in power. And this is seen in the very high level of corruption and the stunted growth of the citizenry despite the huge resources that this country is endowed with. The present organization of government in Nigeria imposes little control over public funds and one of the results of this is the unbridled corruption that has eaten deep into our social fabric. Most governors use state money worse than they use personal money. And all these are to the detriment of national development.A good monitoring by relevant state institutions, governmental or non-governmental, will reduce leadership tendency to further corrupt the already corrupted judiciary. I have been saying this: that Nigeria needs to strengthen her institutions, to make the country workable and protected.There is also the need for the judiciary to look inward and cleanse itself of whatever may be responsible for the unfortunate situation.THE Bar is also known to have raised the financial stakes of brief handling to an astronomical level thereby restricting quality representation to rich politicians and incumbent holders of public office with unfettered access to state treasury. How can we make the poor plaintiff get quality representationNotwithstanding the high cost estimates of the Bar, pro-bono services will still be rendered. The condition in these instances usually is that the litigant should have a good case. Those of us in the human rights community put the right of the litigant before the wealth of the lawyer. This may explain why we have honour more than our colleagues and why they have money more than us.No matter what, a plaintiff with a good case will get good, legal representation, particularly from some of us who are committed to that cause.Do you think the new Electoral Law can adequately guarantee justice in election petitionsAn electoral law only establishes the rules of justice in election cases. It is the judge under law that guarantees justice when he loathes corruption and is fair-minded. Unfortunately, the judges of our time are not like the judges of old. A whole lot of them are neither godly nor contented. But we must state that there are exceptions to the disorder.That brings us back to the issue of sanitizing the entire judicial system, which, I hope we will achieve some day. There are still very good judges, who are contented, godly and incorruptible in our system and these ones are the hopes of the country.From your experience as a leading counsel in the last round of election litigation, what should be done to quicken delivery of justiceThe rules of litigation in election cases have not only simplified the process, they aim at fast track process. It is sufficient for the judges to be alert to follow the rules. If the rules are followed and the judges are not distracted either by lucre or other influences, we should in almost all the cases, have quick delivery of justice. I think the bulk of the responsibility lies on the shoulders of the bar and the bench. If there is oneness of purpose and we are driven by the desire to ensure justice, the rules have been emplaced to achieve these aims.
Click here to read full news..
