Natasha: Failed Recall Process Has Confirmed INEC’s Integrity, Credibility, Independence – Opara

Maxwell Opara is a lawyer and a human rights activist. In this interview, he speaks on the failed bid to recall the senator representing Kogi Central, Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, why the process to recall an elected representative is very rigorous, among others. JOY ANIGBOGU brings the excerpts: Can you speak on the failed recall of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan? The constitution established the procedure upon which a recall process can be initiated.

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), that is the institution in charge of the process, received a petition. So after going through the petition in line with the law, they didn’t meet up with the threshold upon which they submitted the petition. And it was rejected.



So there is nothing more anyone can do about it because it goes a long way to establishing the fact that the recall process must follow due process. What are some of the key lessons that could be learned regarding the proper legal requirements that are needed for initiating and executing a successful recall process in Nigeria, particularly in relation to the burden of proof and verification of signatures? By this decision, INEC has been able to establish the fact that the recall process must not be compromised by irregularities. That one is one.

Two, it has also gone a long way to emphasise the fact that there is no shortcut. You must follow the due process adherence to the procedure established by the law. Three, it has also gone a long way of establishing INEC integrity and credibility in following the due process.

If you watch what is happening in Nigeria, almost everybody, 80%, to 90% of Nigerians have lost confidence in all establishments in Nigeria, vis-a-vis INEC in conducting elections. INEC in being independent is doing something that is fair. Then also, the National Assembly followed the due process, just like when the President declared a state of emergency.

So, we are all hoping that the National Assembly can do something to ensure that the President follows the due process of the law. But everybody says, forget about the National Assembly. Before we say Jack Robinson, the National Assembly through voice vote supported what the President did.

Now, with this particular issue, people have lost confidence in INEC. But by taking this decision, now INEC has been able to establish their integrity, their credibility, and their independence. So, that is a lesson we can learn from the decision of INEC.

From a legal point of view, if the reasons for the failed recall are addressed eventually, can the constituents attempt another recall bid? Yes, they can re-initiate the process because, one, if all those discrepancies have been addressed, they can re-apply. Because the constituent did not say that you will not re-apply. You will re-apply if you have gone through the reasons for rejecting the application, put your house in order and re-apply.

Then, if you meet up, because the essence of recalling is to allow the constituents to monitor their representative, to have a control over their representative. So, the question there is that, will you meet up the threshold? If you meet up the threshold and you come back, you will be recalled. But, I doubt whether they will meet up with that threshold from what I have observed.

What role do you think the public perception and or media coverage play in shaping the legal arguments and the eventual outcome? It’s a very difficult procedure, considering the political position involved. Because, as you are mobilising people to come out, Senator Natasha Akpoti is also mobilising people not to come out. I believe you can easily get people to mobilise people, not to come out, than to mobilise people to come out.

So, that is the rigid procedure. Did this failed recall process highlight any of the ambiguities or shortcomings that exist within our electoral laws? And what potential reforms, in your opinion, do you think might be necessary? The issue of getting the signature of those that elected the Senator. The issue of getting their numbers.

The issue of getting their passports are very rigorous procedure. Remember that where you didn’t meet up that particular requirement, it will not flow. When will you go to how many wards we have in Kogi Central Senatorial Zone? Go round the entire polling booths, get the people involved, call them out to verify their signatures and their phone numbers.

I doubt whether that one will be possible. So, if all those cumbersome procedures can be removed, then we can now talk about an end, or possibly if we can apply technology into it. But calling out people in the polling booth to come and verify, it will never happen in Nigeria.

Especially in this period, people are angry with the entire system. Nobody will come out. I may be wrong, but that is my position.

Any form of amendment will still need to be done by the legislatures themselves. And of course, I’m looking at this scenario whereby that would be uncertain in that regard. So, you talked about the cumbersome nature of this.

So, is this giving us the illusion now that the House members, representatives are untouchables? And if there is a need to checkmate the excesses, should they arise, they are very confident that in terms of recall, it might not even happen. Our recall process is just like proving irregularities in an election petition. If you watch the precedent established by the Supreme Court in various election petitions, you discover that to prove irregularities in an election petition is a very difficult one.

That one is one. Then also, to amend the constitution is also a very difficult one. I’m just mentioning all these processes.

To impeach the president is a very difficult one. To even impeach the Senate president or the speaker is a very difficult one. So, I don’t know whether the drafters of the constitution intentionally put all these procedures here.

It’s a very difficult procedure. Just like where you said there is irregularity, the person who alleged must call all those polling agents one after the other to come and prove to court. You can see what the tribunal said a couple of days ago in respect of Edo State election petition tribunal.

So, the point I’m trying to make is that this is not the only rigorous procedure we have in our electoral law. The electorate has no control over those they purportedly elected. They have no control.

Recalling them, impeaching them, protesting even. To protest in Nigeria now is a very difficult one. They will ask you to go and get approval from the police.

Even when the court says that it is wrong. So, the electorate has no control. That’s the reason why you see a politician does everything humanly possible to allow the person to go to court and allow the person to do whatever.

So far, INEC has declared a winner. So, we don’t have control over the people that we elected. The electorate has no control.

Speaking of Senator Natasha, based on your analysis of the entire situation, what are some of the likely legal avenues that the senator’s political opponents might pursue next? Anything can happen in Nigeria. In Natasha’s case, the law says you cannot suspend more than two weeks. But she was suspended for more than two weeks.

It’s a six-month suspension. So, maybe after that six months, they may resume, suspend her for another six months. So, in Nigeria, a lot of things can happen.

You can see what is happening in Rivers State. Now, the sole administrator, he said that he’s going to revisit or renew the 2025 budget. To be presented to who? Is this the suspended House of Assembly? So, anything that does not happen in Nigeria, cannot happen in Nigeria, does not exist.

So, I don’t know how anything can happen anyway. So, after that six months, the opponents can look for another means under the constitution and do anything they like..