Human rights lawyer Femi Falana has defended the decision of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) not to file any processes in the ongoing Supreme Court appeal involving the African Democratic Congress (ADC), stating that the move aligns with constitutional principles.
According to a report by Vanguard, Falana explained that INEC is legally obligated to remain neutral in disputes arising within political parties, particularly cases already before the Supreme Court awaiting judgment. He emphasized that the commission’s decision neither to support nor oppose any party reflects its duty as an impartial electoral umpire.
Falana cited the Supreme Court ruling in the case of Attorney-General of the Federation v Atiku Abubakar as a key precedent reinforcing the importance of institutional neutrality. In that judgment, which involved contributions from Pius Aderemi, the court criticized both the Nigeria Police Force and INEC for actions perceived as partisan in political matters. The ruling underscored that electoral bodies must avoid conduct that could suggest bias, warning that such behavior could undermine public trust in democratic institutions.
According to Falana, neutrality is not only a constitutional requirement but also essential for maintaining credibility in electoral administration. He stressed that INEC must be seen to operate fairly and without favoritism toward any political party or faction.
He further explained that intra-party disputes are internal matters that should not involve electoral bodies, cautioning that any intervention could compromise INEC’s constitutional mandate. Falana concluded that the commission’s current stance in the ADC case demonstrates adherence to established legal principles and reflects best practices in democratic governance.
He also urged stakeholders to respect the judicial process and avoid making statements that could prejudice ongoing cases, emphasizing the importance of preserving the integrity of electoral and legal institutions…..See More
Leave a Reply