Waziri, Yobe PDP and Rule of Law

Some of the newspaper articles apparently penned for or on behalf of the PDP candidate went so far as to suggest the ‘fool proof’ nature of the cases he filed while a few others have generally tended to push the courts in a direction that seems to suggest to the judges what they have to […]

Some of the newspaper articles apparently penned for or on behalf of the PDP candidate went so far as to suggest the ‘fool proof’ nature of the cases he filed while a few others have generally tended to push the courts in a direction that seems to suggest to the judges what they have to do.
It is trite to note the futility of such an exercise. First, judges in a court of law do not base their judgments on the basis of personal sentiments or hinge points of law on opinions expressed on media pulpits. Courts work on the basis of the evidence before them and on the precedence set by law. Second, both cases filed by Waziri at the Elections Tribunal and a Federal High Court in Abuja have yet to be heard. It would therefore amount to going beyond the pale (or what some would call sub judice) to begin to subject matters of law that have yet to be decided to the kind of reviews that could have granted judgment even before it was passed by the judges.
It is also a matter of common sense that cronies itching to go ahead of the courts tarry awhile and reflect. Historically, Yobe PDP had produced its governorship candidates on the basis of primary election in which all sections of the State have been fully represented. This was what happened in 2007 when Waziri emerged as candidate and went ahead to contest the election against late Governor Mamman Ali. It was the same thing that happened in 2011 when late Senator Usman Albishir went ahead to defeat Waziri to emerge as the PDP governorship candidate. However, in 2015, the story was different.
Although local government elections had taken place across Yobe State previously, and although the other main party in the State had done its own primary election in the glare of public spotlight, Waziri’s PDP decided that the atmosphere in Yobe was not peaceful and conducive enough for them hold their primary election. So, they moved the primaries to Abuja where only 24 ‘delegates’ reportedly voted for Waziri.
Three other candidates, namely Dr. Yerima Ngama, Hassan Kafayos and Ibrahim Talba immediately issued a statement which was widely circulated across the media disowning the so called primary election which had produced Waziri as candidate. They rejected the outcome and called on the party to cancel it and organise a fresh primary election.
Although the PDP did not ultimately respond favourably to the plea by the trio, two of the primary election candidates, namely Hassan Kafayos and Ibrahim Talba, have reportedly refused to give up and they are later said to have gone to the courts to challenge the very candidature of Adamu Maina Waziri as gubernatorial flag-bearer of the PDP.
Here again come the imperatives of law, procedure and decorum. It is clear that Adamu Waziri would be extremely angry at anyone who would suggest in a public discourse or in cyberspace on social media that the primary election which produced him as governorship candidate was illegal before a competent court of law could hear and decide the case filed by Talba and Kafayos.  
It follows that Waziri supporters engaged in sub judice publications are wrong too to go ahead of the courts to suggest anything before the courts themselves could decide the cases that Waziri has filed. And all of this, in the end, boils down to our conception of democracy and the rule of law and our willingness to uphold both. Is democracy merely a slogan or a practical means of engagement between the people and those willing to lead them? Are elections an opportunity for choice by the people or they are merely a platform to grab and rise to power?
Central to democratic praxis and the rule of law is also the conception of the judiciary as a means of seeking redress. A true democrat believes in the rule of law and in the capacity of the judiciary to dispense justice. It is therefore a non sequitur for anyone who believes in the courts as a means of seeking redress to opt to circumvent or bypass them by engaging in unnecessary and fruitless chatter outside of the courts before a case is properly heard by them. It behoves us as democrats and benefits our democracy to always embody and exemplify the rule of law. It won’t just happen somewhere, it begins from us.
Wagani wrote in from Garki, Abuja.