SAHARA REPORTERS

How the Presidential Elections Petition Tribunal Came To Its Controversial Verdict

Last View on Thu 28th February, 2008
Last Modified on Wed 27th February, 2008 10:07:17 pm
Author: Posted by Admin Saharareporters
 
Saharareporters, New York

An ugly picture is emerging of how the Justice James Ogebe Presidential Elections Tribunal came to its controversial and widely unpopular verdict that validated Umar Yar’adua’s “election” of April 21, 2007. The five-member panel, with Ogebe (who has been nominated for a seat on the Supreme Court abstaining) read a unanimous judgment that dismissed all the grounds on which Muhammadu Buhari of the ANPP and Abubakar Atiku of AC questioned the validity of Yar’adua’s electoral “victory.” Justice John Fabiyi read the verdict in a tone that has drawn strong criticism for its levity and playfulness.

When Buhari's counsel, Mr. Mike Ahamba (SAN) was asked to deliver his impression about the bizarre ruling, he was a portrait of livid rage. In a solemn and composed voice he told the justices to search their “bags of conscience” and then took his seat. The entire courtroom filled with several governors, ministers and officials of the ruling PDP was so silent one could hear a pin drop.

Ahamba’s terse response has been interpreted in some quarters as  a calm but blunt way of telling the justices that they had sold their consciences for financial lucre and other inducements.

Ongoing investigations by Saharareporters reveal that the justices were not only massively bribed by operatives of the Yar’adua government but that the circle of compromised actors reached wide—to top editors and columnists, traditional rulers, politicians and religious leaders.

In the run-up to the verdict, Saharareporters had done several reports that detailed the government’s intrigues aimed at persuading the five justices to give a fraudulent judgment. Justice Ogebe’s U.S.-based son, Emmanuel Ogebe, was awarded several lucrative legal consultancy contracts on litigations against the Nigerian government. The contracts were doubly questionable because the young Ogebe does not have a license to practice law in the U.S.

Barely a week before the verdict’s announcement, the government announced Ogebe’s nomination for the Supreme Court. Our impeccable source said that Justice Ogebe had all along given Nigeria’s Attorney General Michael Aondoakaa his word that Yar’adua would win—on the condition that the government acted expeditiously on his elevation to the nation’s highest court.

Saharareporters had also reported on the government’s successful wooing of Justice (Mrs) Uwani Abba-Aji, the tribunal’s only female member. Yar’adua gave her husband, Musa Abba-Aji, a retired civil servant, high access to Aso Rock by including him on a list of businessmen who intermittently have breakfast meetings with Yar’adua. Also, her husband’s elder brother, former Senator Mohammed Abba Aji remains an unofficial highly influential operative in Aso Rock

One source within Aso Rock told us that the government, unable to question the accuracy of our reports, had reached out to local media operatives, including editors, columnists and reporters to ensure that our reports did not filter into the local media. In fact, as soon as one of our reports indicated that huge monies had been moved from Kaduna and Katsina States to bribe the media to write columns and editorials in support of the yet-to-be delivered ruling, Yar’adua’s handlers quickly changed gear and asked the media to keep silent about the case. In effect, then, most local newspapers only reported the fact that the verdict was coming up on Tuesday, February 26, 2008.

One sign of the unholy alliance between the Yar'adua government and the media came in a communication to several pro-government editors sent by Yar'adua's Special Assistant on Political Affairs (and former Thisday reporter) Bolaji Adebiyi. In the intercepted communication, Mr. Adebiyi gave a select number of editors a carefully vetted list of Nigerians to “interview” as soon as the judgment was delivered. The list included the Sultan of Sokoto, elder politician Adamu Ciroma, Alhaji Shetima Mustapha, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu,Dr. Alex Ekwueme, Arch. Bunu Sherif, Mr. Paul Wampana and retired Colonel Abubakar Umar.

One surprise name is that of Senator Bola Tinubu, former governor of Lagos State. Though Tinubu belongs to the opposition Action Congress, he has long shown covert sympathy for Yar’adua.  

The former Lagos State chief executive had sold his soul to Yar’adua on the account of his personal interest. Apart from undermining his own party’s collective interests, Tinubu used his heavy influence with the Lagos-Ibadan media circle to rein in any negative reports about the illicit efforts to bribe the presidential tribunal. One measure of Tinubu’s success was in the exuberant headlines used by most Lagos-Ibadan-based newspapers to report a verdict that left a pall of shock over Nigeria. Some of the headlines read: "Yar'adua Floors Buhari and Atiku"; "Crushed: Yar'adua crushes Buhari and Atiku."

Our source said Tinubu had struck a secret deal with Yar’adua to help consolidate his tainted mandate in return for two concessions. One is that Yar’adua would save Tinubu from EFCC prosecution on corruption charges. The second is that Yar’adua would cooperate in Tinubu’s grand design to establish himself as the dominant political force in the southwest. But as our source said, “As soon as Yar’adua gets what he wants, Tinubu is likely to be tossed to the dogs. And it would be befitting disgrace for him.”

Yar’adua’s team had planned to use media contacts as well as “well-meaning” Nigerians to harangue both Buhari and Atiku into abandoning an appeal. This plot is already in full gear going by fear mongering that characterized media interviews granted by select individuals, Yar’adua and INEC.

In their desperation to seal Yar’adua’s stolen mandate, the government bribed several reporters to write that the European Union, through its Nigerian head, Mr. Robert van der Meulen, had applauded the ruling of the Ogebe tribunal. The EU today issued a statement denying that the Union was impressed by the verdict.

One of the most scandalous aspects of the ruling, according to our thorough investigation, is that none of the five judges on the tribunal had a hand in writing the verdict. This is according to solid intelligence received by Saharareporters.

“The corruption behind this case will shake up the country as the sordid details become well known,” said our source who provided another high-powered corroboration within the judiciary. “Do you know that neither Fabiyi (the judge who read the verdict) nor any of the other panelists had a single input in the composition of the ruling?” he asked. Once the tribunal members were conveniently "settled" by Yar'adua operatives, the President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Umaru Abdullahi, was recruited to cobble together a team of lawyers, which included a justice of the Supreme Court whose identity was not revealed to Saharareporters, to write Tuesday’s judgment.
 
On the eve of the judgment, Saharareporters had accurately reported that the verdict was in favor of Yar’adua, and that there was pre-judgment celebration inside Aso Rock.

By 8:00 p.m. on Monday February 25, AGF Aondoakaa had read the summary to a select group of Yar'adua's kitchen cabinet members.

In fact, no member of the tribunal had seen the judgment or made any input into it prior to its delivery by Fabiyi on Tuesday. A source at the Court of Appeal told Saharareporters that the other members of the tribunal received their own copies only today (Wednesday, February 27 2008) at about 2:00 p.m. The counsel representing the various parties to the case received their copies at 4:00 p.m.

The fact that the judgment came from outside the tribunal was clearly exhibited by the poor reading by the lead judge, Justice John Fabiyi. One court observer described Justice Fabiyi as “incoherent throughout the reading of the judgment.” He occasionally stopped to go back and correct some obvious mistakes, including wrong dates, wrong words and events. The other judges looked on and concurred without making any input.

Yar'dua’s handlers began giving away their pre-knowledge of the verdict the previous day. They approved a live coverage of the ruling, a concession rarely granted in court rulings in Nigeria, even though the cameras were not allowed to focus on the faces of the members of the disgraceful panel.

Several legal analysts who spoke to Saharareporters described the judgment as predetermined a long time ago. They point to the shady manner the tribunal chairman, Justice Ogebe, had conducted the proceedings. On several occasions, Ogebe refused to allow evidence needed to make a good case to be presented at the tribunal. He also rejected the carefully documented reports of rigging compiled by local and international observers of the election.

A source close to Buhari’s legal team told Saharareporters that Justice Ogebe invoked “his past credibility and trustworthiness” to fool Buhari lawyers into not calling witnesses. Ogebe reportedly kept assuring Ahamba that it was not necessary to call witnesses before the court. The source said it was Justice Ogebe who suggested that Ahamba depose ANPP's witnesses en masse, only for the ruling to disqualify all but one of the witnesses on a flimsy technical ground.

“It was a legal ambush shamefully orchestrated by the chairman of the panel,” said our source. “And Ogebe’s intent was to help Yar’adua by removing a whole bundle of evidence from the case in general. The justices knew there was no way they could have ignored evidence from 76 witnesses, if they were properly cross-examined in an open court, so they persuaded Buhari’s counsel that he could depose his witnesses. They turned around to dismiss those witnesses and their testimony. It’s a low point for the judiciary.”