Afenifere challenges Ohaneze for invoking Nigerien military coup-type for Nigeria because of electoral case

The pan-Yoruba socio-political organization, Afenifere, has called for caution by those who, hiding under the guise of freedom of expression, tend to engage in incitement bordering on both treason and contempt of the court.

The admonition was contained in a statement signed by the organization's National Publicity Secretary, Comrade Jare Ajayi while reacting 

to a statement credited to a factional Secretary-General of Ohaneze, Mr. Okechukwu Isiguzoro, in which he was pre-empting the Presidential  Election Petition Tribunal handling the cases that arose from February 25, 2023 presidential election.  

It would be recalled that Ohaneze Ndigbo, in a press release issued on Tuesday, August 4, 2023, and published by, among others, The Independent, Daily Post newspapers etc., insinuated that the type of military situation that occurred in neighbouring Niger Republic in July this year might happen in Nigeria if “the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal (PEPT) judges ‘came up with “an erroneous judgement”. 

Reacting to this, Afenifere asserted that apart from constituting an intimidation of the judiciary, this statement is also inciting as “everyone knows that the only means of changing government known to law is through the ballot box. This is not just a constitutional provision in Nigeria, it is also the norm in all countries that hold the right of the people to determine who govern them as sacrosanct”. 

Afenifere spokesman considered the aspect of Isiguzoro’s statement on FCT status in regard to election results as sub-judice in view of the fact that it is one of the key issues that is before the court. Isiguzoro, in his statement had asserted that “the interpretation of the constitutional requirement for a presidential candidate to win 25 % of 2/3 of the states and the Federal Capital Territory FCT), Abuja, is a crucial issue that the judiciary must address”.  He then lunged into what could be interpreted as a threat: “We emphasize the consequences of an erroneous judgment in light of recent events such as the Nigerien military coup.” 

According to Ajayi, this statement is too weighty not to be challenged because of its far-reaching implications. 

“In the first place, the issue of FCT status on which there was already a judicial pronouncement is also one of the issues before the Tribunal presently. Secondly, even if a party in a political case considered the judgement of a tribunal or court as ‘erroneous’, the option is not to call for military takeover as  the law clearly provides room for proceeding to the appellate court. Thus, Isiguzoro’s position, among other things, contravenes Section 133 of the Criminal Code Act in Nigeria. The Code in subsection (4) says that a person is in contempt of the court if “while a judicial proceeding is pending, makes use of any speech or writing, mispresenting such proceeding,

 or capable of prejudicing any person in favour of or against any party to such proceeding, or calculated to lower the authority of any  person before whom such proceeding is being had or taken”. 

Ajayi went further to state that what Isiguzoro did fell under what is considered ‘ex facie curiae’ i.e., contempt committed outside the court since his statement was not made inside the court where the case is being heard. Underlying how serious the judiciary takes the issue of contempt, the spokesman of the pan Yoruba organisation quoted Justice Mohammed as saying that “It is justice itself that is flouted by contempt of the court, not the individual court or judge who is attempting to administer it” (1999).