A prominent lawyer and the Chairman of Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) of Nyanya/Karu branch in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Barr. Alex Ebi Edim in this press interview with Ekunkonye Junior in his office shares his opinion on the recent protest by the African Democratic Congress (ADC) at the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) headquarters. He sheds light on the lawfulness of the protest and the meaning of “status quo” as contained in the Court of Appeal ruling. Excerpts:
What is your opinion on the protest by the ADC at the INEC headquarters?
The protest, in my view, is lawful.
The right to peaceful assembly is preserved in our constitution, and the protest was civil, without threatening the peace and security of the nation. The protest was a civil way of passing a message, and no legal or moral injury was caused.
Was it right for INEC to delist the Senator David Mark-led National Executive Council (NEC) of the ADC?
Ans: INEC misinterpreted the true meaning of maintaining status quo. Status quo means “present state of affairs” or “as it is presently,” implying no further steps should be taken.
The question is, what was the state of affairs before the order was granted? Ans:The court didn’t make an express order ousting the Senator David Mark-led national executive, so it’s unclear why INEC acted as it did.
What does “status quo” mean in this context?
“Status quo” is a Latin word meaning “present state of affairs” or “as it is presently.” It denotes progressive obedience, not retrospective obedience.
INEC should have maintained the present state of affairs, rather than taking a step that alters the situation.
Is this issue more political than legal?
Ans: Yes, in my view, this issue is more political than legal. The court’s intention is unclear, and INEC’s actions may have overstepped. The issue requires careful consideration, taking into account the pending suit at the Federal High Court in Abuja.
Should the ADC have approached the court instead of protesting?
While the court is the best place to resolve disputes, the ADC’s protest was a legitimate way to express their grievances. The protest was a form of peaceful assembly, guaranteed by the constitution.
What are the implications of INEC’s actions?
INEC’s actions may have prejudiced the pending suit and undermined the rule of law. It’s essential for INEC to respect the court’s process and maintain neutrality.
Can the Senator David Mark-led national executive council continue to function?
Until the court determines otherwise, they remain the legitimate leadership. The status quo should be maintained, and no further steps should be taken.
What advice would you give to the parties involved?
I advise them to seek legal clarity and respect the court’s process. The court will ultimately determine the issue, and parties should await its decision.
How can INEC avoid similar situations in the future?
Ans: INEC should seek clarity from the court and maintain neutrality. INEC should be cautious not to take sides or prejudice pending suits.
What is the likely outcome of the pending suit?
No comment
Should the protest be seen as a success?
The protest highlighted the issue, but its success depends on the outcome of the pending suit. The protest was a legitimate expression of grievance, and we’ll see how it plays out.
What message do you have for the ADC and INEC?
I urge them to respect the court’s process and seek legal clarity. The rule of law must be respected, and parties should await the court’s decision.
How does this issue affect the ADC?
The issue affects the party’s leadership and stability. The ADC needs clarity on its leadership to move forward effectively.
What role should the court play in resolving this issue?
No comment
What is your final take on the issue?
The issue is complex, and parties should seek legal clarity. Ultimately, the court’s decision will provide the necessary clarity and resolve the issue.
