The Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday
granted an order of perpetual injunction
restraining President Goodluck Jonathan
and the Service Chiefs from deploying
soldiers for the general elections.
Justice Ibrahim Buba held that they cannot
deploy soldiers without the National
Assembly’s approval.
Besides, he said any election which is
militarised through deployment of soldiers
where there is no insurrection is “anti-
democratic” and not in consonance with
constitutional democracy and civil rule.
Justice Buba was delivering judgment in a
suit by House of Representatives member
Femi Gbajabiamila who sought a declaration
that deployment of soldiers for elections is
unconstitutional.
President Jonathan, the Chief of Defence
Staff, the Chief of Army Staff, the Chief of Air
Staff, the Chief of Naval Staff and the
Attorney-General of the Federation are the
respondents.
The plaintiff said the Federal Government
deployed soldiers during the governorship
elections in Anambra, Ekiti and Osun states,
contrary to the Constitution.
Justice Buba upheld arguments by the
plaintiff’s counsel, Mr Seni Adio, adding that
even President Jonathan does not have the
power to deploy soldiers at whim.
The judge dismissed the defendants’
objections to the court’s jurisdiction and to
the plaintiff’s locus standi, saying
Gbajabiamila had the legal right to demand
an interpretation of the constitution by the
court.
He disagreed with the defendants who said
soldiers were only deployed to ensure
peaceful elections, holding that the army is
not needed for such civil duties.
Justice Buba said he was bound by the
recent Court of Appeal’s decision, which
nullified soldiers’ deployment for elections.
He quoted the decision extensively, adding
that he was also persuaded by the judgment
of Justice Mohammed Rilwan of the Federal
High Court, Sokoto.
According to the judge, the law does not
make provision for the military to be
involved in civil activities, and if soldiers
must vote, it must be in their barracks. “The
armed forces/military have no role in
elections,” he said.
“The time has come for us to establish the
culture of democratic rule in the country and
to start to do the right thing, particularly
when it has to do with dealing with the
electoral process which is one of the pillars
of democracy.
“In spite of the behaviour of the political
class, we should by all means try to keep
armed personnel and military from being a
part and parcel of the electoral process.
“The state is obligated to confine the
military to their very demanding assignment,
especially in this time of insurgencies, by
keeping them out of elections. The state is
also obligated to ensure that citizens
exercise their franchise freely and
unmolested,” Justice Buba said.
The judge said the Court of Appeal directly
interpreted the Constitution when it held
that the combined effects of Section 215
and 217 limit the president’s power to
deploy soldiers to the suppression of
insurrection and to aid the police to restore
order when it has broken down.
“I am bound by the decision of the Court of
Appeal and equally persuaded by the
decision of Federal High Court Sokoto, which
also persuaded the Court of Appeal.
“It is in this regard that the court will say
that its duty in interpreting the constitution
has been simplified and made easy by the
decisions I have referred to extensively,”
Justice Buba held.
On whether Gbajabiamila has locus standi,
the judge said: “The plaintiff is at liberty to
approach this court and seek reliefs
whether they are beneficial to him or not. In
the instant case, the plaintiff is a Nigerian;
he has a right of franchise, so it will be
beneficial to him.
“This court will not dabble in academic
issues. The instance Originating Summons
has merit. The court shall proceed to answer
the questions for determination in favour of
the plaintiff that the deployment of the
armed forces by the first, second, third,
fourth and fifth defendants during elections
violate the provisions of the Constitution.
“Accordingly, the declaratory reliefs sought
are granted. Any militarised voting pattern is
anti-democratic and not in consonance with
constitutional democracy and civil rule.”
