Former President Goodluck Jonathan has criticised Nigeria’s multi-layer election tribunal system, urging the National Assembly of Nigeria to reform the country’s electoral dispute process.
Speaking in Abuja at the 70th birthday and book launch of Gbenga Daniel, Jonathan proposed the creation of a “constitutional court” to handle political and election-related cases more efficiently.
He argued that the current three-tier system — from tribunal to the Court of Appeal and then the Supreme Court — has become ineffective.
“I remember a particular case where someone lost an election as a governor because the law then stipulated the use of red ink to tick voters’ names,” he said.
“In an entire senatorial district, they were not provided with red pens and used available black or green pens.
“As a result, those votes were cancelled. The appeal court upheld this, even though the lower tribunal felt that a tick is a tick.”
Jonathan noted that while reforms later allowed governorship cases to reach the Supreme Court of Nigeria, the issue of prolonged litigation remains unresolved.
“If the supreme court would continue to be the terminal court for governors’ elections, then they don’t need to go through the lower tribunal so that it would just be one step,” he added.
“I believe the ideal thing to do, which I was considering when I was in office, was to make sure that it’s only one tribunal that listens to any litigation relating to politics.
“This is done, especially in the Francophone countries in Africa. They have constitutional courts, anything about elections, only the constitutional courts that take decisions.”
He also urged the judiciary to remain firm in its rulings to ensure fairness in the political system.
“Politics is like soccer and the judges are the referees. If the referee looks the other way, players will break legs or score with their hands,” he said.
Reflecting on public perception, Jonathan added: “There are a lot of stories about me. Maybe 50 percent of them, whenever I read, they are not correct. But people say whatever they want to say.
“So, it’s only when the author himself, when the actor documents it, then people say, oh, this is what happened.”