More reactions trail postponement of elections

OFFICIALS of the Independent Election Monitoring Group (IEMG) has picked holes on the reasons adduced by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Chairman, Prof. Attahiru Jega, for postponing the 2015 general elections, saying it was tantamount to a civilian coup by the electoral body.

  The group, in a statement by its National Co-ordinator, Mr. Festus Okoye, said “we are not convinced and will not accept the postponement of the February 2015 elections as the reasons given are not cogent and verifiable.”

  According to Okoye: “We view the postponement as unwarranted and a coup against the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Nigerian people and therefore unacceptable.

  “We condemn the decision by the security agencies and forces not to provide security for the February 2015. The said decision is a coup against democracy, the constitutional order, the electoral process and the Nigerian people.”

  But Governor Abdul’aziz Yari Abubakar of Zamfara State has called on Nigerians to accept the postponement of February general elections to March and April with good faith, as God has already determined who is going to win at polls.

  Addressing newsmen yesterday at Government House, Gusau, the state capital, Yari described the postponement as something destined by God, and appealed to people of the state to remain law abiding.

  He said he hoped that the security situation of the country would have seriously been improved and addressed before the commencement of the presidential election come March 28 this year.

  In the same vein, former delegates to the 2014 National Conference, Col. Tony Nyiam (rtd) and spokesman, Yoruba socio-cultural group, Afenifere, Mr. Yinka Odumakin, have expressed lack of confidence in the ability of the Chairman, INEC, Prof. Jega to conduct the 2015 general elections based on some recent revelations and allegations against him.

   The duo, speaking under the aegis of the Transition Resurgent Group (TGR), called on the Inspector-General of Police, Mr. Suleiman Abba, to investigate allegations levelled against Jega of colluding with the Northern Elders Forum to manipulate the planned elections in favour of a particular presidential candidate.

  The group said that the INEC chairman had continued to gloss over the allegations made against him by the Southern Nigeria Peoples Assembly (SNPA) where he was said to have met with leaders of the Forum.

  Meanwhile, a human rights activist, Mr. Femi Falana (SAN), has condemned the statement made by the National Security Adviser (NSA), Col. Sambo Dasuki and military that they the could not provide security for February election that led to postponement of general elections by Prof. Jega, ‎adding that reliance on Section 25 of the Electoral Act is ‘totally’ misleading.

   In a statement made available to The Guardian yesterday, ‎the human rights lawyer said INEC ought to have rejected the politically-motivated request for the postponement of the elections.

  He said that Dasuki has no powers whatsoever to give directives or advice to INEC.

  He said, among others: “By saying that they would not provide security in aid of civil authorities pursuant to Section 217 of the Constitution, the security chiefs have committed the offence of mutiny contrary to Section 52 of the Armed Forces Act.  Contrary to the mistaken belief of the INEC leadership, the armed forces have no role to play in the electoral process.”

  He pointed out that the security chiefs are not members of the National Security Council; neither are they members of the Nigeria Police Council. “Therefore, they lack the constitutional power to make any authoritative pronouncement on the security of the nation. Even though the NSA is a member of the National Security Council, he cannot usurp the constitutional responsibilities of the body with the connivance of the service chiefs.

  Falana alleged that because President Goodluck Jonathan could not persuade the National Assembly to extend his tenure using the battle against insurgency as alibi as provided for by the Constitution, the service chiefs made themselves available to be used when they claimed they could not provide security for the polls.