By Mark Baber
December 4 – Hopes the Nigerian Football Federation (NFF) Electoral Appeals’ Committee would return football in the country to at least a semblance of rational rule-based administration were dashed on Wednesday as members of the committee broke ranks with their Chairman, Barrister Okey Ajunwa, failing to publish a report but signing a press statement “deciding” to dismiss all appeals against the highly disputed elections of September 30 which brought the current leadership of the NFF to power.
Ajunwa reportedly denied all knowledge of the “decisions” produced by the members of his committee. It remains to be seen whether he will stand his ground and produce his report, which was widely believed might decide the election should be rerun, with the inclusion of those parties who sat out the election because they had won a court order preventing it from going ahead, and including the losing candidates who have variously complained about gross irregularities in the process and the payment of bribes to those who voted for the winning candidate.
The statement, issued by the NFF and signed by Electoral Appeal Committee members Mallam Sani Mohammed, Dotun Coker, Victor Nwangwu, Bala Garba and Secretary Mohammed Sanusi says that: “Members disagreed on the Chairman having the last verdict on legal opinion, and it was resolved that all decisions shall be taken collectively by the Committee.”
The statement, which claims to be drawn up “in line with global best practice” rejects each of the appeals in one or two sentences, chiefly, it appears, on procedural grounds. In the case of losing candidate Leonard Igbokwe, his appeal against the election result has been rejected on the basis that he was a participant in the election and therefore had no locu standi to challenge it.
Whilst sections of the Nigerian media are reporting the press release as if it represented a unanimous and final decision on the legitimacy of the election of Amaju Pinnick, other journalists are asking the obvious questions as to whether a report has actually been produced, whether the chairman of the committee will now produce his own report, what legal basis there is for the committee members to announce “decisions” of which their own chairman is unaware, who was involved in arranging this “committee coup” and – were inducements offered?
Contact the writer of this story at moc.l1734877597labto1734877597ofdlr1734877597owedi1734877597sni@r1734877597ebab.1734877597kram1734877597