The decision recognizes the fact that May 29, is not sacrosanct and that the only sacrosanct document is the Constitution. What the constitution says is four years from the date the person was sworn in as the governor. Unfortunately, there is this general perception that terms of office for elected officials must be terminated by May 29 regardless of the date of assumption of office. That can only be true if the person would have completed his four-year term by May 29. Peter Obi was not sworn in on May 29, 2003 and because he became governor after his legal victory and was sworn in thereafter, he has to recapture his time by staying in office beyond May 29, 2007. Hence, the four year tenure of Obi commenced from the day he was sworn in and will terminate on 17 March 2010. That is the legal position and I think that is fair enough.
Can a person who was sworn in on May 29, 2003, impeached in 2005 and later returned to the office in 2006 when the Court nullified his impeachment also recapture his time? This is doubtful. Again, what the constitution says is four years from the date of swearing in; the four-year period would start running from May 29, 2003 regardless of the illegal impeachment. When a governor is impeached, his deputy, being his alter-ego, steps in to expend the remainder of his term. A returning governor cannot recapture such period from his deputy because each day the deputy governor spends in office as the acting governor burns up the governor?s four-year term which may not be recaptured. However, this decision brings us to the fact that the election tribunals should dispense with election petitions in a timely manner. Our judicial system is very slow. A situation where election petitions takes up to three years to decide does not augur well for democratic development.
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content1'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('comments'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content2'); });