May 30, 2010
As President Goodluck Jonathan gets set to name a new chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) tomorrow, opposition politicians, democracy activists and lawyers say they are disturbed by widespread rumors that former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Salihu Alfa Belgore is the likely appointee. Shortly after arriving in France on Sunday, Mr. Jonathan met with Nigerians in a town hall format and announced that he would be making known the name of the new INEC chairman tomorrow. Alfa Belgore, who is reportedly over 73 years of age, is a member of Jonathan’s Presidential Advisory Committee and is reportedly backed by the chairman of the body, Theophilus Danjuma.
The speculation about Belgore’s impending appointment has spurred widespread criticism from lawyers, judges, and opposition politicians who described Belgore as “one of the most corrupt jurists in recent Nigerian history,” in the words of one critic.
An Abuja-based senior advocate of Nigeria told Saharareporters that if Justice Belgore is appointed to chair INEC “then Nigeria’s hope for free and fair elections would have ended even before the start of Goodluck Jonathan’s transition program.”
That conclusion was echoed by the leader of a civic group committed to the nurturing of democracy. “The general consensus within the ranks of the democratic coalition is that Belgore’s appointment to head INEC will immediately erode public evidence in Dr. Jonathan’s fabled promise to ensure credible elections come 2011,” she said.
Another democratic activist added, “Nigerians deserve a clean break from the [Maurice] Iwu model. But Justice Belgore is not going to be different from Professor Iwu in any positive sense. Surely, President Jonathan can find a woman or man of proven integrity to head our most important electoral institution.”
Another lawyer drew our correspondent’s attention to a stunning claim made by recently retired Chief Justice Legbo Kutigi during the last election litigation process. “You would remember that Justice Kutigi revealed that a ‘former CJN’ was involved in corrupting electoral tribunal judges,” adding that lawyers and judges knew that Belgore was the former CJN Kutigi was referring to. The lawyer stated that Belgore was known to have received huge amounts of cash from several state governors, including those of Bayelsa and Rivers, to pervert the course of justice at election tribunals. “Belgore not only disbursed cash to rogue judges to pervert justice, he also invited susceptible tribunal judges to his Abuja home and promised them promotions or transfers to so-called ‘lucrative’ judicial divisions,” the lawyer stated.
A top associate of former Governor James Ibori also revealed that Belgore was recruited to act as a heavily paid intermediary for the fugitive former governor who is now facing extradition procedure in Dubai.
In the early stages of Ibori’s trial for money laundering before a federal high court in Kaduna, Belgore gave a widely reported speech in which he argued that it was improper to try anyone outside the jurisdiction where an alleged crime was committed. “That speech lay the foundation for the court of appeal headed by Justice Amina Augie in Kaduna to quash Ibori’s trial in Kaduna.” Subsequently, Ibori and the Delta State government worked in collusion with the chief judge of the federal high court to establish a court in Asaba that was designed to quash the charges against Ibori. The former governor even personally chose a notoriously corrupt Justice Marcel Awokulehin to preside over the court in Asaba.
Several lawyers pointed to Belgore’s six-month stint as CJN as one of the most controversial. In one instance, he elevated 25 lawyers to the rank of Senior Advocate Of Nigeria (SAN), including the names of some favorites who were not qualified to be SANs. “Typically, only 17 lawyers are granted SANs annually, but Justice Belgore padded the list in order to include five lawyers from Ilorin, his hometown,” said an Ibadan-based SAN.
But it is the history of Belgore’s role in election cases that is most troubling for his critics. As a member of the Supreme Court panel that adjudicated the 2003 presidential election case involving former President Olusegun Obasanjo and retired General Muhammad Buhari, Belgore ruled that INEC did not need to submit the election results as evidence in court. “The legal position is that a party that withholds evidence, and has done so deliberately, should be held to account by the bench,” said a lawyer. He added, “The Court of Appeal in that case had ruled otherwise, but Belgore, when confronted by Buhari’s lawyers in the case on the rules guiding court evidence, said the lawyers ought to have pursued INEC with contempt of court.”
Besides, when the Court of Appeal condemned the use of soldiers and police to rig elections, Belgore said he did not see anything improper in the role played by those agents.
Belgore has also given weird verdicts in non-electoral cases. In a case involving murders allegedly ordered by Mohammed Abacha, a son of the late dictator, Sani Abacha, Belgore led other Supreme Court justices to rule that Mohammed had not committed any crimes by paying off some members of his killer squad to flee Nigeria. Mohammed Abacha had sent his hired killers on the run as the federal government found out that he had been using killer squads and began trying him for murder crimes.
Speaking in a furious tone, a Kano-based lawyer told our correspondent, “That ruling led to the freedom of Mohammed Abacha, who is now a candidate in the governorship race of Kano state,” adding that “the impression everywhere was that Belgore and his team were bought.”
In a fierce dissent in the Abacha case, Justice Akintola Ejiwunmi, a minority on the five-man panel, described the decision as a “tyranny of the majority.”
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('comments'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content1'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content2'); });