Lagos lawyer and human rights activist, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, has asked the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Mahmoud Mohammed, to step into the crises of confusion of election petition cases ongoing in some states of the Federation
This according to him is to save the judiciary from imminent loss of integrity and respect in the society.

In a statement he issued in Lagos, Adegboruwa urged the CJN to use the appeals pending before the Supreme Court, in the cases of Rivers, Akwa Ibom and Taraba states, to correct the seeming confusion created by the decisions of the lower courts in these cases.
The Lagos-based lawyer maintained that the Supreme Court should use these cases to set a global precedence for the lower courts to follow in election petition cases.

He also lamented the situation whereby the impression is being created in the minds of the public that different standards of judgments exist for different people and different political parties and different interests.

Citing the case of Rivers State, Adegboruwa stated that, “a serving judge, Justice Pindigi, who was the first judge to head the Rivers State Elections Petition Tribunal, made an allegation that he was approached by a certain prominent politician in Rivers
State, to decide the election petition to favour a particular political interest but he declined the offer”.

He noted that as a result, Justice Pindigi’s panel was dissolved abruptly and the new panel that was constituted was set to do what Justice Pindigi refused to do.

According to Adegboruwa: “We cannot sit by and accept such political influence of the judiciary by politicians”.
“It is not surprising therefore that the elections petition tribunal in Rivers State proceeded to nullify the elections of virtually all members of the House of Assembly, House of Representatives, senators and eventually that of the governor”.
He however called on the CJN to demystify the notion created from the judgments coming from Rivers State.

On Taraba State election, he expressed satisfaction on what the Court of Appeal has done in the state, but according to him it is not enough, “the Supreme Court should go a step further and correct the anomalies of Rivers State in particular, especially when those judgments run contrary to existing judgments of the Supreme Court on similar facts,” he added.