Edo Election Tribunal: The Brigandry Must Stop
By Elempe Dele
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, the German idealist and the 19th-century philosopher, did not distance his thoughts from the responsibility of the state when he said, “The state embodies the ethical ideals of justice, freedom and collective responsibility.”
It is part of the responsibility of the state armed with authority to prevent, investigate, punish, and redress human rights abuse, including violence, within its confines. The state can do these through regulations and adjudication.
I am particular about adjudication because of the wave of violence that has greeted the Edo State Election Tribunal hearings where pictures and news of violence have dotted news headlines since its commencement in December, 2024.
The first week of the tribunal’s sitting had witnessed some clashes between the members of the ruling party, the All Progressive Congress, APC, and the main opposition party, the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP. A thug with a gun was captured on video shooting sporadically into the air and shouting, “give us back our mandate” on a street next to the High court. Non-state actors, for the second time in a row invaded the tribunal sitting venue and were alleged to have attempted to disrupt the tribunal process. The desperate individuals, it was learnt, tried to force themselves into the venue of the sitting of the Justice Wilfred Kpochi-led three-member tribunal, but were repelled by the security personnel. In another sitting, party supporters clashed with private security personnel who were said to have accompanied a candidate in the September 21 governorship election to the Edo High Court premises where the tribunal is sitting.
I think these acts are not putting Edo State in good light. This actions must be nibbed in the bud before they excalate. We have had several such tribunal sittings all over the country, I cannot recall any where such unremitting violence was ever recorded. Why should that of Edo State be different?
The truth is, even if the venue of the tribunal sitting is filled to capacity by supporters like the 1950 record attendance of 173,850 spectators of the Maracana Stadium, this will not change or affect the decision of the tribunal after reviewing evidence. So the question before every sane lip is, “of what use is the recklessness, negative optics and desperation?” There must be specific reason for each action. I cannot fathom any one single reason why people who are not directly or even remotely connected to the case should be there at the venue formenting trouble.
In my own opinion, the most potent evidence in election petitions are the forms EC8C. The results documented on this forms originate from polling units where votings were held and party agents are deployed to sign against the actual results emanating from there. I say this because the results which are gotten from each polling unit and signed by agents, with copies domiciled with each party, must be the same with the result used to declare the winner of the election eventually. So there is no point in fighting at the venue of the tribunal when counsels to each of the parties involved are already armed with their documented evidence, and witnesses.
At this point, going forward, I suggest that the governor, Senator Monday Okpebholo, should use the strategy of an adjudicator: Call the chairmen of the two major political parties together in a meeting with the security agents. Explain in simple but lacerating terms why the actions of these party supporters would no longer be accepted in the premises of the tribunal – read the riot act. Perhaps there should be accredited numbers(limited) of party members from the party secretariats who will only be allowed at each hearing. These persons must have tags issued by the security agents as they sign agreements that they will conduct themselves in manners that will not offend public safety during each hearing.
When this is done, fine-tuned beyond my suggestion, yet some non-state actors still persist with their hitherto brigandry, the security agents must act swiftly to arrest such individuals and prosecute them to act as deterrent. No one single individual or individuals within the state has the authority above the rule of law, and these actions which are pernicious to peace and stability, especially in such a very sensitive atmosphere where the security lives of those involved in the election tribunal matters should not be handled with gloves that kids wear.