One time Chairman of Nigeria’s Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Attahiru Jega, has called for urgent reforms in Nigeria’s judiciary, stressing the need to mandate the resolution of all election-related disputes before the swearing-in of elected executives.
He called for a review of Nigeria’s electoral laws to mandate the electronic transmission of results, describing it as a critical step towards improving transparency and accountability in the country’s electoral process.
Making a speech at The Platform, a civic engagement programme organised by The Covenant Nation to commemorate Nigeria’s Democracy Day in Lagos on Thursday, Jega criticised the current judicial process surrounding elections, describing it as slow, compromised, and in need of immediate reform to restore public confidence.
He said: “There is the need to improve upon the provisions of the Electoral Act to make electronic transmission of results mandatory.
“The Nigerian judiciary also needs to be urgently reformed. Globally, the judiciary is said to be the last bastion of hope for the common man. In the Nigerian context, it is really far, far, far from being the bastion of hope for the common man.”
He decried the recruitment process into the judiciary, which he alleged has been undermined by cronyism and a lack of proper vetting, leading to the appointment of individuals without competence or integrity.
Jega advocated for institutional changes that would make it compulsory to conclude all legal contests around elections before elected officials are sworn into office.
“It should be made mandatory that all election disputes are resolved before swearing in of elected executives,” he said, adding that the judiciary must play a non-partisan and impartial role, with greater speed in the dispensation of justice.
Jega further called attention to the long delays often associated with pre-election cases, citing instances where legal challenges lasted years after elections were concluded and officials had been inaugurated.
“A situation in which a pre-election matter can last three, four years before it is addressed—long after the wrongly sworn-in person has been there—is terrible.
“I recall a case when I was at INEC. Somebody elected in 2011 and the pre-election dispute lasted until 2014. By that time, he had been a member of the National Assembly receiving all the perquisites.”