Protect this democracy at all costs

The election tribunals have begun the crucial process of unraveling the truth behind the grievances brought forth by the parties aggrieved by the last general elections, causing palpable anticipation and anxiety throughout the nation. This is also the second chance for all accused institutions to demonstrate their unwavering integrity and allay the fears of the critics and skeptics who seek to dismantle this functional system of government that we have committed to practising.

So far, our judiciary, which some members of the losing camps in the elections view as an architect of doom, has made a statement with the latest court update on the Osun State election. When Ademola Adeleke, the gubernatorial candidate of the PDP, emerged as the winner last year with 403,371 votes, defeating then-incumbent Governor Gboyega Oyetola, who polled 375,027 votes, Oyetola rushed to the court to have the election result overturned.

The outcome of the Osun State governorship election stood out not because it came before the general elections, but because it took power away from the ruling party. The subsequent tribunal has set in motion a climate of polarisation around the outcomes of the 2023 elections. In a split judgment of two-to-one delivered in January, the tribunal held that Oyetola, and not Adeleke, won the majority of the lawful votes in the election. This was interpreted by those sympathetic to Adeleke as a state-authorised attack on democracy.

The allegations of over-voting against Adeleke, which led to the deduction of his votes, were addressed by the Court of Appeal the following month. The court’s three-man panel voided and set aside the decision of the tribunal on the grounds that the tribunal erred in holding that a case of over-voting was established, which led to the deduction of Adeleke’s votes.

In April, as the parties awaited the verdict of the Supreme Court, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), in its cross-appeal, challenged the decision of the appellate court for failing to declare the judgment of the tribunal a nullity. INEC contended that the verdict of the tribunal’s majority judgment was invalid due to the failure of the second member to comply with Section 294 (2) and (3) of the Constitution, which required her to either express her opinion in writing or deliver it in open court.

What started out as a legal dance, with bystanders waiting to cite the outcome as the death of Nigerian democracy, has been put to an end by the Supreme Court on Tuesday. The apex court has affirmed the election of Governor Adeleke, with the five-member panel of the court, led by John Okoro, unanimously upholding the earlier decision of the Court of Appeal. This is the type of democracy that we must strive to promote, one that is not based on individualistic or partisan proclivities.

Governor Adeleke’s victory must have inspired faith in those who interpret democracy as a means of achieving only outcomes that favour their cause. However, all parties must assure their supporters that democracy is a game of wins and losses. The presidential election petition tribunals are there to prevent avenues for protesting the election outcome outside of the court. We have seen the alternative pursued by other countries, which include coups or misguided revolutions, and their tragic outcomes serve as a lesson on how not to undermine democracy.

Any citizen who is displeased with the election results and promotes the idea of war must tune in to international radio or TV stations to witness the true meaning of war, as seen in Sudan. Regardless of the flaws in our democracy, we must continue striving to protect it from individuals or groups that seek power through unconventional channels. The tendency to submit to such desperation is high in a country where democracy has been under a menacing threat.

Sudan has imploded, and Chad has drawn a sword to start an ideological war with Germany and Europe, as they have been reluctant to conduct elections and offer the people an avenue to choose their preferred leaders. The rest of the world is wary of these trends, given the successful and attempted military coups that have undermined democracy in countries like Mali, Burkina Faso and Guinea Bissau. These are warning shots for Nigeria.

We cannot rely on any so-called First World country to help run our country, and that is why we must support our public institutions to address the grievances recorded in the elections. The mighty America, to whom some have written letters advertising Nigeria’s political troubles, is unfortunately not in a position to police even the smallest country on this planet, let alone an oil-rich state that trades in their currency.

Developed economies across the world are ganging up against the US, threatening to relegate its prized dollar and sanctioning an enduring democracy in a region that has become a hub of military coups and transitions is a luxury that does not align with their foreign policy objectives. What American policymakers seek right now to survive in an anarchic space, where their long-running allies are rethinking their economic, political, and military dependency, are dollar-seeking partners to retain their geopolitical advantage.

The pursuit of self-interest is a moral imperative for every country, and the United States is currently focused on cultivating relationships with nations that have the potential to undermine the value of their dollar. Even if President Joe Biden were facing imminent danger, he would not interfere in the internal affairs of Africa’s largest economy. This serves as a stark reminder to temper any bellicose tendencies and safeguard our democracy at all costs.