The sacking of governor Peter Mbah is inevitable
7 min read
Mr Peter Mbah
By Emeka Ugwuonye
From day one, the mathematical absurdity that occurred in Nkanu East electoral district left me with no other conclusion than that Peter Mbah was declared winner based on a dangerous manipulation of votes and an absurd abuse of the voters in Enugu State. That was what got me interested in this case. Otherwise, I did not know either Peter Mbah or Chijioke Edeoga prior to this election. But once I got interested, I did my research on the two men, and I was further convinced that I could support Edeoga. Anyway, not to make it a judgment on personalities, I am satisfied that Chijioke Edeoga won the election clearly, squarely, and by a wide margin. I am also satisfied that Peter Mbah probably bribed INEC officials to distort the election results and declare him the winner. I am from Enugu State. I am 56 years old. I am Harvard trained. I will be totally useless to my people if I were to keep quiet and watch such absurdity gain root and thrive in Enugu State. To speak out is the least I could do for my state.
I saw the petition filed for Edeoga. I saw the response filed by Peter Mbah. Having been a lawyer for more than 30 years in multiple international jurisdictions, I could immediately assess the merits of the Petition against Mbah and Mbah’s defense there-against. I was able to determine early that the Petition was fairly strong and that Mbah had an uphill task defending against it. I know that in this part of the world, people are inclined to yield to sentiments and wishful thoughts. But not for me. I had to look at three things: (1) the law, (2) the facts, (3) the evidence, and eventually to a fourth thing, which is the advocacy or persuasion, i.e., the ability of the lawyers to articulate and present their cases.
On the issues of comparative advocacy and persuasive competencies of the lawyers, I would say that the two sides are equally competent and well-matched. So, it boils down to the three main factors. The law is clear enough. The facts are fairly straightforward, yielding three grounds to back the petition. Initially, the challenge was in the evidence. But as I looked at the evidence and observed the testimonies in court, I realized that Mbah would be in trouble. First, his NYSC issue is difficult for him to overcome. NYSC as an institution has come out to state in clear and unequivocal terms that they did not issue to Mbah the certificate he has been peddling. That means that Mbah’s certificate is a forgery. If Mbah had not presented a certificate and NYSC said they did not issue him a certificate, that would have been a different thing. But there is an “NYSC certificate” that did not come from NYSC. If Mbah had claimed that he had a certificate but lost it and could not find it, then there might be an issue for DSS to testify on or for anyone who once saw such certificate to testify that he once saw the certificate. But here, there is a certificate that has been denied by the agency that was supposed to have issued it. So, DSS testimony on this is useless and quite an absurdity.
DSS is a law enforcement agency. It enforces the criminal laws of Nigeria. It’s work is to investigate and prosecute suspects of crimes. The only crimes in this case are the forgery of certificate and then perjury. Instead of investigating forgery and perjury for the purpose of prosecution or otherwise, DSS investigated how NYSC should do its work, how it should issue certificates, and how it should keep records of certificates The same DSS could not investigate the BVAS manipulations or the rigging of elections by INEC. It could only investigate the NYSC processes. But is DSS investigating whether anyone in NYSC committed a crime? What is the business of DSS in this matter? Corruption and criminality, and nothing more, must be the only explanation of DSS involvement. It is a shame and ignoble for anyone connected with DSS to play the role suggested yesterday by Mr. Yahaya Isah Mohammed. It is a shame, to say the least. But thank God it is of no effect. Mr. Mohammed or DSS is in no position to investigate whether NYSC does its work well. It will be like NYSC investigating DSS. DSS mandate is to tell us what crime was committed and who committed such crime and to prosecute that person. Instead, somebody who calls himself a DSS officer probably accepted a bribe from Mbah and came to peddle mischievous improbabilities in court.
Having said that, the updates on this trial point to one inevitable outcome. Peter Mbah is going home. Peter Mbah failed to testify in his own defense. He failed to face the people of Enugu and defend his certificate. He gave many interviews to bloggers and TV stations. He deployed many people to defend his certificate. He went to court to sue NYSC for the certificate issue. But he failed to face the people when given the opportunity to do so. That was because he was afraid to face cross-examination that would have exposed his lies. As I warned earlier, the people of Enugu may never forgive Peter Mbah for taking them for a ride.
The following is the summary of the proceedings as of yesterday:
(1) INEC begged to close its case without calling a single witness. INEC closed its case without presenting a single witness to defend it against the allegation that it rigged election. In law, when you fail to defend, it it taken that you have admitted the allegations against you. This took Mbah’s lawyers by surprise because his lawyers immediately begged for adjournment in order to “tidy [their] house”. If this move was a coordinated move, Mbah’s lawyers would have been ready immediately to proceed to call their witnesses.
(2) When Mbah’s defense commenced, Mbah called two witnesses – one Dr. Festus Uzor and one Mr. Yahaya Isah Mohammed. Dr. Uzor was to be Mbah’s star witness. Dr. Uzor admitted that there was over-voting in the polling units. He also agreed that INEC committed mathematical error in its computation of the polling units affected, where the number of votes scored by LP was mistakenly recorded for PDP during LGA collection. Also, Dr. Festus Uzor admitted that there was indeed wrong computation in those polling results he was shown in the witness box. Further, Dr. Uzor was asked if he was aware that from 10th July 2003 when Mbah was claiming he was actively serving his NYSC one year service that he Mbah was already appointed as Chief of Staff to Enugu State under His Excellency Chimaroke Nnamani. He replied he didn’t know. Clearly, Mbah’s star witness thoroughly damaged Mbah’s case beyond any resuscitation.
(3) Mr. Yahaya Isah Muhammad, who claimed that he was a Deputy Director of SSS and that he came to honor the Subpoena invitation on behalf of the DG (SSS) did not fare any better. When asked to show the Court any prove that he truly came on behalf of the Agency because of the following inconsistencies: (a) his investigation was not authorized by the Agency but by, instead by Onyechi Ikpazu and Associates, (b) the so-called investigative report was not written with headed paper of the Agency, and (c) neither is the report he brought before the Court have the stamp nor the seal of the Agency: When confronted with this question, Mr. Mohammed admitted that the investigation was not authorized by the agency but one legal firm that he can’t remember. Also, he admitted that the report was actually not written in headed paper of the Agency and that the report don’t truly have neither date, the signature of the DG SSS, nor stamp and seal of the Agency.
(4) Peter Mbah closed his defense. That is: Peter Mbah decided not to take the stand and testify. He failed to say a word in the tribunal for his certificate or for his right to remain in office as Governor of Enugu State. The meaning is obvious. He does not want to face cross-examination.
(5) The tribunal adjoined to Thursday 20th July 2023 for PDP to open their defense. Note that PDP had told the court that it (PDP) had only one witness and would be calling that witness today (20th July). PDP indicated that it will close its case today.
You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to understand that this trial has come very close to an end. Once the Defense (last of which is PDP) closes today, the case will be reserved for judgment. These judges are very likely to give their judgment in early August. As to the outcome of the trial, it seems pretty obvious. Peter Mbah has done everything possible with money to change the situation and to stay in office as Governor of Enugu State. Unfortunately for him, that will not be enough. He should focus more now on how to render an account for the time he occupied that office. It is so unfortunate for the people of Enugu that they had to go through this ordeal after casting their votes and making a clear choice.
Finally, let me warn: Peter Mbah has shown so much desperation to be in that office. So, even if this judgment is clearly against him, he will still go on appeal to the Supreme Court. Going on appeal will give him two extra months to prolong his usurper status. From what I have seen of him, he is willing to occupy the office for the two extra months just for the fun of it. God help Enugu people.
