Nigeria: Supreme indecision

After many months of delay, Nigeria’s Supreme Court on Thursday is scheduled to begin hearing the petitions of two former presidential candidates in a case that has the potential to unseat President Umaru Yar’Adua.  Former military ruler Muhammadu Buhari and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar allege massive electoral fraud in the election that brought Yar’Adua to power 17 months ago.  While Yar’Adua remains favourite to survive the ruling, the president’s ineffective government and ill-health have fuelled speculation that the court could find against him.

Since taking office, Yar’Adua has failed to impress.  Having delivered little on key issues -- including boosting electricity supplies and calming the insurrection in the Niger Delta -- Yar’Adua has become a lame duck president, whose ebbing authority has been aggravated by the protracted legal battle over his right to govern.

A major problem for Yar’Adua has been his health.  At the end of August, he departed for Saudi Arabia, ostensibly to carry out the 'lesser hajj'.  However, media reports suggested that his trip took in several hospitals, and he may even have undergone a kidney transplant.  Yar'Adua returned to Abuja in the early morning hours of September 6, and was reportedly helped off the presidential plane by medical personnel.  The president -- who suffers from the rare Churg-Strauss Syndrome -- had already been hospitalised in Germany earlier this year.  These scares have raised questions as to Yar’Adua’s ability to govern, and have also brought the matter of who will succeed him as president to the fore. 

According to the constitution, the presidency would pass to Vice President Goodluck Jonathan, should Yar’Adua die whilst in office.  Yet in practice, such a scenario is unlikely.  Like Yar’Adua, Jonathan’s skills and experience are both limited and parochial and he has little standing amongst political elites. Moreover, as a southerner from Bayelsa State in the Niger Delta, it is doubtful that Jonathan would be acceptable to core northern interest groups. There is an unofficial agreement that the presidency should rotate between the regions and a Jonathan presidency would amount to a significant shortening of the North’s control of the presidency.

The April 2007 election was deeply flawed and the technical merits of Buhari and Abubakar’s case alone could be significant enough to persuade the seven Supreme Court justices find against the president.  In light of the uncertainty over Yar’Adua’s health -- and the unnerving prospect of vice-presidential succession -- the may also consider a new election to be the lesser evil than continued uncertainty over Yar’Adua and Jonathan’s tenure.  Whatever the ruling and its eventual result, judicial uncertainty in getting to this point has compounded the medical questions surrounding Yar'Adua, further diminishing his influence in the near term.

>