Teaching Comparative

Difficulties of creating a rule of law

To follow up on the item from yesterday (Democracy by court order), here is another case from Nigeria that illustrates how difficult it must be for lawyers and judges to create a rule of law where precedents don't exist. (Think of the Marshall court in the early USA.)

The news report comes from This Day (Lagos).

Before you give up on the complexities of the case, here's what was at issue. Peter Obi [at right] appeared to have won the governor's race in the state of Anambra [dark red on the map above] back in 2003. However, challenges to the honesty of the vote prevented Obi from taking office until 2006. So he only served a year before the 2007 election to replace him.

In the 2007 election, Andy Uba [at right, below] was the victor. However, after a challenge from Obi, the Nigerian Supreme Court ruled that Obi should be allowed to serve his full 4-year term. Uba sued to challenge that ruling and the court has reaffirmed its earlier decision.

This would be a good case for a class discussion. What is the essence of the rule of law? Why should an elected official's term be cut short by legal proceedings when that official wins the case? Why should a term in office be extended, contravening legislation? Can it be legal to deny an elected office to someone who won a legal election (either Obi or Uba)?

Anambra - Again, Obi Floors Uba At S'court

"The Supreme Court yesterday refused to set aside its June 14, 2007 judgment which had restored Mr. Peter Obi to the office of Governor of Anambra State...

"Obi had won his election petition against the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) over the 2003 governorship election in the state, but the prolonged court processes meant he had spent only one year out of a four-year tenure by the time he assumed office in March 2006.

"The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had gone ahead to conduct fresh elections in Anambra last April, returning Chief Andy Uba as governor, but the Supreme Court ruled last June that Obi's tenure should run its full course from the day he was sworn in.

"Uba's request for review had been viewed as a test of political cases already settled by the apex court which could have set a precedent for similar requests by those who lost at the court...

"Reacting to the judgment, Obi said there was clearly no winner or loser in the case.

In a statement by the governor shortly after the judgment, Obi said the decision by the Supreme Court 'underscores the general belief that the judiciary is the last hope of the common man'."

---

Labels: elections, Nigeria, rule-of-law

posted by Ken Wedding @ 8:53 AM