Justice Bulkachuwa Finally Recuses Herself From Presidential Tribunal

Irrespective of the unanimous ruling which affirmed her position as the head of the presidential tribunal, President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Zainab Bulkachuwa, on Wednesday disqualified herself from presiding over petitions challenging the outcome of the February 23 presidential election.

Her withdrawal followed a motion the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its presidential candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, filed to challenge her decision to preside over the five-member panel tribunal hearing petitions seeking to invalidate the re-election of President Muhammadu Buhari.

PDP and Atiku had insisted that Justice Bulkachuwa’s involvement in the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal was prejudicial to its case against Buhari, since her husband and son, are card-carrying members of the ruling All Progressive Congress, APC, which it cited as the third Respondent in the petition. 

Meanwhile, at the resumed proceeding on the matter on Wednesday, Justice Bulkachuwa, after over six hours stand-down, finally announced her decision to step-aside from the case. 

She took the decision shortly after four other members of the panel, in a lead ruling that was delivered by Justice Peter Ige, held that the PDP and Atiku, failed to establish that she had in any way, exhibited any form of bias in the proceeding. 

Justice Ige noted that the main crux of the petitioners allegation was not that Justice Bulkachuwa had not been objective in the case, but only that there was tendency that she would be biased against them in view of her family tie with her husband and son being members of the APC.

 He held that the petitioners failed to prove that the panel was constituted in a way that its independence could not be guaranteed. 

Justice Ige further held that the petitioners drew wrong inference from a speech Justice Bulkachuwa delivered at the inaugural sitting of the tribunal on May 8. 

“I am of the firm view that enough material have not been placed before this court to show that the presiding Justice is likely to be biased in the hearing of the petition”, Justice Ige held, saying four exhibits the PDP adduced before the tribunal was ”not weighty enough to input any likelihood of bias.”

Tight security at the Court, as Atiku seeks private meeting with tribunal panel(Opens in a new browser tab) He held that neither Justice Bulkachuwa’s husband nor his son were parties to the petition, adding that the essence of constituting a five-man panel to hear the case was to guarantee fairness and justice, notwithstanding the fact that the law permitted at least three Justices to entertain the case. I am of the view that the petitioners have not been able to particularly establish the need for the presiding Justice to recuse herself from further participation. "Consequently, the petitioners’ application fails and is hereby dismissed."

There will be no order as to cost”, Justice Ige held. 

Other members of the panel that concurred with the ruling were Justices Abdul Aboki, Samuel Oseji and Joseph Ikyeghn. 

Meanwhile, shortly after the lead ruling, Justice Bulkachuwa said she was minded to hands off the case on personal grounds. 

She said: “For personal reason I will be recusing myself now. I insisted that the matter be tried fully so that next time, another female judge will not face what I faced. “I am withdrawing. A new chairman will be appointed in due course."

However, the four member panel will be continuing with hearing of any pending application. 

Meanwhile, the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC) and Women In Nigeria (WIN) promptly condemned President Bulkachuwa’s withdrawal, insisting that the allegation against her was anchored on “baseless political reason and unjustified ground”. 

CISLAC and WIN, in a statement, said they were seriously concerned about the continued marginalisation, unchecked discrimination and abuse of women despite existence of the ratified protocol, National Gender Policy, Violence Against Women Prohibition Act, Gender and Affirmative Action and Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which guarantee comprehensive rights to women, including the right to adequately engage in the political process, socio-economic space, health, justice system in both public and private spheres. 

The development came on a day President Buhari told the tribunal that he was not aware that biological son of Bulkachuwa, Aliyu Haidar Abubakar, campaigned for his re-election. 

Buhari said he only got to know that Abubakar was his supporter after he read a copy of the motion the PDP and its presidential candidate, Atiku, filed to disqualify Justice Bulkachuwa from presiding over the five-man panel tribunal that is hearing petitions challenging the declaration that he won the February 23 presidential election. 

President Buhari, who is the 2nd Respondent in Atiku’s petition marked CA/PEPT/02/19, said his attention was further drawn to exhibits that contained newspaper cuttings, indicating that Justice Bulkachuwa’s son canvassed for votes in his favour. 

Nevertheless, in a written address he filed in support of an 11-paragraphed affidavit he lodged to counter Atiku’s motion, President Buhari, insisted that the petitioners, failed to prove that Justice Bulkachuwa had in any way, exhibited any form of bias against them, since the petition was entered before the tribunal. 

The counter affidavit was deposed to by one Kolawole Andrew Aro, a litigation officer in the chambers of President Buhari’s lead counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN). 

In the written address, President Buhari, who was represented at the tribunal on Wednesday by a team of lawyers led by seven Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs), said he had since his emergence to power, refrained from dabbling into the membership of any judicial panel. 

He said he never interfered with the constitution of any tribunal, “whether the panel is adjudicating on election petitions relating to the office of President, Governor, National or State Assembly, or sitting in any civil or criminal matter howsoever”. 

President Buhari said he had no power whatsoever to decide those to be appointed into any judicial panel or tribunal, stressing that such interference would amount to a gross abuse of the principle of separation of powers. 

He said he was aware that Justice Bulkachuwa had at the inaugural sitting of the presidential election petition tribunal on May 8, assured all the parties that in dealing with the petitions, the court, would be guided by the constitution, the law and international best practices. 

Consequently, he maintained that Atiku and the PDP, had no reason whatsoever to be apprehensive about the involvement of the Court of Appeal President in the adjudication of their dispute with regards to the outcome of the 2019 presidential election. 

According to him,  “Having said that, and bearing in mind the sole issue distilled for determination by the respondent supra, it is the respondent’s humble submission that whether or not the honourable President of the Court of Appeal should recuse herself from further sitting or participating in the proceedings in this petition and be replaced by another justice of this honourable court to sit in his place to hear and determine petition, as prayed by the petitioners, is within the prerogative and discretion of the honourable President of the Court of Appeal.

 “What is to be taken into consideration in coming to one decision or the other in respect of the application is also within the exclusive discretion of the honourable President. 

“This is not a decision that can be dictated to her by either the petitioners or respondent or any of their counsel.

 “When it comes to matter of discretion, the judge or justice involved is the sole determinant. 

“The honourable President of the Court of Appeal had not displayed any bias in favour of any or the parties, particularly the Respondent. “For the respondent, it has no reason whatsoever to complain about any of the justices sitting on the panel or any Justices of Court of Appeal for that matter."