Every sound mind knows that whoever is driven by desperation and vengeance always goes beyond the limits of reasonableness.
Without being immodest, some of them have suddenly relapsed into pitiable political situations where their senses of judgement seem beclouded by desperate quest for power even at the risks of having their values and worth progressively being eroded.
It is a popular maxim in the legal profession that he who alleges must prove. But in the parochial understanding of a sectional mushroom association known as PDC and its sole owner, allegation automatically means proof, provided they are repeated over and over again irrespective of its emptiness or demerits. And also because the promoter of the group has since lost touch with the realities on ground it is now apparently difficult for him and co-travelers to appreciate that the masses are more politically-aware now than before.
Oh yes, tyrants are always the last to know that the world around them have changed. There are more refined and decent ways of doing things in the society today. People are no longer easily-manipulated or intimidated. They have since realized that publicity does not translate into performance and also, that propaganda no longer sways public opinion just as wolf-crying is not able again to thwart the course of justice.
The electorates today prefer evidence-based campaign in contrast to deceptive media blitz that particularly obtained in Enugu State in her dark days. No doubt, his departure from the party that gave him prominence and abused powers was indeed a good riddance especially for the state because there is now a new order where internal democracy, party discipline and rule of law guide activities. The era of impunity and corruption belongs to an inglorious past. So no amount of smear campaign can change the prevailing popular ideology that the ballot is better than the bullets.
As an illustration, after aggressive public incitements, hoodwinking of other contestants into half-heartedly rushing to the tribunal to join hands in laying false claims to another man?s electoral victory and then futile efforts to prove her insinuations constitutionally, PDC has resorted to cheap blackmail as her stock in trade. It is quite saddening that the false reportage against constituted authorities and aimed at further incitements was effected through a respectable medium.
One Dan Nwomeh, recently planted a story tainted with sufficient falsehood against INEC and which at its best, pre-empted the National and State Assembly Tribunal sitting in Enugu. The subject was Chimaroke Nnamani?s stubborn refusal to accept defeat this time as he did in 2011 when Gilbert Nnaji first carpeted him. Having exhausted all democratic avenues without success, hostile media swindling is now the only option left for the community party to attract public sympathy. And it must be deployed with reckless abandon.
The incoherent article lacking both in elegance and organization was laced with substantial contradictions which largely necessitated this piece primarily to set the record straight for the benefit of the unsuspecting public. His own PDC machinery was the first to be accused of sabotage for his failure at the polls, followed by the PDP before INEC. Finally, the tribunal reportedly ?denied? him the opportunity to coast home victory. And as such, the public esteem of the judicial body must be lowered as revenge. This is a symptom of combined acute effects of desperation and politics with bitterness.
The author alleged that ?The day after the polls, the results of four of the six local govern?ments in the district were declared?but the results of the remaining two LGAs of Isi-Uzo and Nkanu East were allegedly detained into the night by INEC officials amid spreading rumours of well coordinated result colla?tion manoeuvres. When the result for Isi-Uzo LGA was finally declared with Nnaji?s tally up?turning Nnamani?s seemingly unstoppable lead, the political landscape rumbled with disbelief and outrage?.. INEC further declared Nnaji as the winner in Nkanu East LGA, a traditional Nnamani stronghold?…. In April, Dr. Nnamani petitioned the election tribunal in Enugu, which began sitting in May, urging the tribunal to declare him as the winner of the polls.
Joined in the suit were the PDP and INEC as the second and third respondents, respectively. Nnamani suffered some losses when the tribunal, in its ruling of 5th August, struck out a number of paragraphs in his petition but found substantial facts in the remain?ing paragraphs to sustain the petition. ?This reporter obtained a copy of the accreditation record tendered before the tribunal which is quite revealing in its meticulous analysis.????. On 6th August, the tribunal directed the petitioner to bring an expert witness to present the report of the forensic examination of the materials used for the election by INEC.??..This reporter also obtained the main re?port as tendered which identified 20 types of irregularities constituting serious violations of the Electoral Act as well as INEC?s elec?tion guidelines and manual. ?.When hearing opened on 17th August, the tribunal gave the two sides 14 days each to close their cases.
While the petitioner ap?peared in a hurry to call as many witnesses as possible to prove his case, the respon?dents placed many hurdles on his way. Not surprisingly, the petitioner succeeded in calling less than 20 of the 412 witnesses earlier listed, consisting mainly of his party?s collation agents. While the witnesses painted pictures of an election severely compromised by an INEC/PDP conspiracy, the respondents were able to extract from them concessions of instances of irregulari?ties in some places won by the petitioner.
When the respondents? turn came, they ap?peared tentative on calling witnesses, twice applying for adjournments until left with only four days?..As a lawyer who has followed the case explained to this reporter, the respondents were not under pressure to call witnesses, pointing out that the onus of proof lies with the petitioner to prove beyond any shadow of doubt that he indeed won the election?.The counsels to Nnaji and the PDP, and the former?s witnesses, stuck to their position that the election was above board. Along with INEC, they also repeatedly argued, citing page 50 of the INEC election manual, that the only irregularity that can nullify an election is where the total votes cast exceed the total accredited or registered voters. The PDP, however, elected not to call any witness?.
From the fore-going, the self-acclaimed reporter severally shot himself in the leg. A man who was dutifully attending the court sessions and even rhetorically admitted that ?Nnamani suffered some losses when the tribunal, in its ruling of 5th August, struck out a number of paragraphs in his petition? suddenly made a U-turn such that rather than concede that his principal had a bad case as usual, relied on what ?a lawyer who has followed the case explained to this reporter?.
Furthermore ?this reporter? wrote that ?as hearing opened, Nnamani tendered over 1,000 evidences comprising mostly of result sheets, voters? registers and other INEC documents used for the election which were admitted and marked as exhibits?.the crucial INEC polling unit card reader accreditation data for the election which was generated by the ICT department and signed by the commission?s Director of Legal Services….He also listed a total of 412 witnesses to prove his case?.
But once again, instead of observing that as the matter progressed, the petitioner?s lead counsel and witnesses clearly saw the emptiness of the case and became dampened consequently, which in his words was why ?? not surprisingly, the petitioner succeeded in calling less than 20 of the 412 witnesses earlier listed, consisting mainly of his party?s collation agents?. Of course, the ?procured? witnesses fled when the first set to put up appearance narrowly-missed imprisonments for forgery and perjury. They could not fit into the desperate orchestrations.
It would be recalled that ?this reporter? arrived at his conclusions ?amid spreading rumours of well coordinated result colla?tion manoeuvres?. This constitutes a potent challenge to his professional competence. Grave issue as this calls for investigative journalistic skills.
Interestingly also he ?rumoured? that ?the respondents were not under pressure to call witnesses, pointing out that the onus of proof lies with the petitioner to prove beyond any shadow of doubt that he indeed won the election?.The PDP, however, elected not to call any witness?.
Oh yes, it is only dwarfs that need platforms. You do not need multitude of witnesses to prove the truth although ?the petitioner ap?peared in a hurry to call as many witnesses as possible to prove his case? but was too heavy to jump the ?many hurdles on his way? for-which he only ?succeeded in calling less than 20 of the 412 witnesses earlier listed, consisting mainly of his party?s collation agents?. What a defeatist cry! Besides, it is not in doubt that where accredited voters are less than the number of votes cast there is an irregularity. Yet ?this reporter? could not establish any such incident. Instead, he relied on ?spreading rumours of well coordinated result colla?tion manoeuvres?. Pity!
Nevertheless, every enlightened mind recalls that a day after the elections, precisely on Sunday, 29th March 2015, the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, made published statements to the effect that following the hitches associated with the card readers therefore elections of March 28 2015 was based on both manual and electronic accreditations otherwise ?this reporter? should not have been criminally silent on the accreditation reports of the two council areas where ?perfect elections? were held even though he was honest enough to ?report? that ?the respondents were able to extract from them (the petitioners) concessions of instances of irregulari?ties in some places won by the petitioner? .
Funny enough, when questions were raised as to whether the card readers deployed at ?those places won by the petitioner? were customized or if the INEC regular and ad-hoc staff that worked there were specially-equipped for the peculiarities of such terrains for-which there were no anomalies, the ?petitioner? was ironically caught napping.
It is equally instructive that ?this reporter? failed to mention at what time, how and where ?the day after the polls, the results of four of the six local govern?ments in the district were declared?but the results of the remaining two LGAs of Isi-Uzo and Nkanu East were allegedly detained into the night by INEC officials amid spreading rumours of well coordinated result colla?tion manoeuvres?. Evidence of wolf-crying! But the tribunal certainly cannot be intimidated.
Another worrying aspect of his sealed lips was in respect of the reason that was adduced for Nnamani?s abysmal outing in Isiuzo LGA. Perhaps, ?this reporter? did not see the need to mention that according to Eric Ebeh whom ?this reporter? made vain efforts to misrepresent in his ?advertorial?, the Isi-Uzo people viewed the election as a ?pay-back-time?. In his words while testifying, ?Chimaroke Nnamani was governor for eight years and senator for four years but there was nothing that Isi-Uzo as a people could remember him for.
He did not even visit us for once as senator. As such when he shamelessly came for our votes we used the occasion as pay-back-time? Again, when Nnamani first raised the false alarm shortly after the elections, PDP, in a statement observed that ?Senator (Prince) Gilbert Nnaji, had twice represented Isi-Uzo and Enugu-East Federal Constituency during-which he left landmark achievements before defeating Chimaroke Nnamani in 2011 for the first time. And in the same vein, his records of VERIFIABLE achievements were clearly fantastic of-which Isi-Uzo seemed to be the most beneficiary both in infrastructure, empowerment and manpower development.
It is as well laughable that ?this reporter? deliberately refused to ?report? that the witness from Nkanu-East LGA ?a traditional Nnamani stronghold? argued that the council area was the worst-hit while Nnamani was in power stressing that as a former governor and senator, none of his former commissioners or even aides ever joined him to any campaign outing just to demonstrate his overall acceptability. And stunning enough, no Nkanu indigene was among his ?less than 20 of the 412 witnesses earlier listed, consisting mainly of his party?s collation agents?. How else does one describe a man that has since outlived his political relevance amongst his people? These and many more unsavory testimonies truly shaped the electoral outcome.
Additionally, a peripheral examination reveals that both the election results of March 28 and April 11, 2015 followed a near uniform pattern particularly in the areas that PDC challenged, which is an indication that Enugu is a PDP state. And for the umpteenth time, Gilbert Nnaji had floored Chimaroke Nnamani four years earlier. The same people he ruled for 12 years are today the voters! How time flies!!
In conclusion therefore, ?this reporter? also having come to terms with the futility of his principal?s case resorted to ill-informing the public as to the credibility of the imminent verdict which has been the style of the one-man party, PDC. But thank goodness that according to his tilted ?record of proceedings? which to all intents and purposes represented his counsel?s prepared address to the tribunal; they admitted that despite that ?Nnamani suffered some losses when the tribunal, in its ruling of 5th August, struck out a number of paragraphs in his petition but found substantial facts in the remain?ing paragraphs to sustain the petition?, the petitioner was still allowed to tender ?over 1000 evidences? and ?listed 412 witnesses? as well as bring in an ?expert witness? .
Yet in their wild-goose chase, they cried that the tribunal denied them victory.
So if with all those brandished arsenals, the ?petitioner? and ?this reporter? could not ?prove beyond any shadow of doubt that he indeed won the election? then the hollowness of both the materials and claims are not questionable, meaning therefore that lies cannot stand the test of time. Time for campaign gimmicks has since been over.
But simply because desperation has taken a fundamental toll on the psyche of some politicians they now resort to public sympathy over a matter still pending before a tribunal. In short common sense dictates that this their defeatist attitude reflects that PDC has finally realized that a lie doesn?t become truth, right doesn?t become wrong and evil doesn?t become good, just because it is accepted by the majority???..
BY EGBO MON-CHARLES.
