The Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC),

The Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Attahiru Jega, has expressed doubts on the possibility of delimiting constituencies before the 2015 general election, as scheduled. Jega hinged his fears on the lack of interest by the National Assembly as well as the controversy surrounding the census figures. Also, Minister of Information, Mr. Labaran Maku, has accused politicians of preparing for elections as if they are preparing for war. Jega and Maku spoke Tuesday just as the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, in Abuja, Justice Ibrahim Auta, frowned on the refusal of Jega and Zinox Technologies Limited to appear in court to prosecute their request for a stay of execution of the N17.3 billion judgment entered against them. Jega and Maku spoke in Abuja at a seminar organised by the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) on media coverage of election. Jega, who was not optimistic that the delimitation would hold, said the commission would continue to work in this regard, with the belief that things would improve. Maku, in his remarks, flayed politicians for going into elections as if going to war through the purchase of weapons for their supporters. He however said the 2015 polls would be more peaceful than the previous ones. The minister, who said since 2007, election litigations in the country had reduced by 50 per cent, added that the media in Nigeria were the freest in the world. He also lambasted state-owned media for not accommodating views of the opposition, saying: “As (federal) government, we have no reason to deny anybody access or to promote messages that will divide Nigeria.” Meanwhile, Justice Ibrahim Auta, yesterday frowned on the refusal of Jega and Zinox to appear in court to prosecute their request for a stay of execution of the N17.3 billion judgment entered against them. He said he could not understand why INEC, Jega and Zinox who, in their applications, had created the impression that the next general election were threatened by the judgment, were not in court when they were to argue their applications for a stay of execution of the judgment. Justice Auta in the January 28 judgment had faulted INEC and Jega over the N34.5 billion contracts they awarded in 2010 for the purchase of Direct Data Capturing (DDC) machines for voters’ registration. Shortly after the judgment, INEC, Jega and Zinox applied that the execution of the judgment be stayed on the grounds that they were planning to appeal. They argued, in their applications, that in view of huge judgment sum, they would be incapacitated and unable to function if the judgment was not stayed. In the application filed for them by A. B. Mahmoud (SAN) INEC and Jega drew the court's attention to their ongoing preparations for the 2015 general election and argued that "an execution of this judgment will render it impossible for the applicants to carry out this important constitutional and statutory duty.” BHL filed a counter-affidavit, where it urged the court not to stay the execution of the judgment, because it was incapable of hindering the applicants' operations. The firm added that judgment was not to be paid from the judgment debtors' future earnings or allocations, but from their earnings from the contract for which INEC had paid. The Parties were to appear before the court yesterday to argue their applications. But while John Okoriko appeared for the judgment creditor, INEC, Jega and Zinox were not represented. The development angered the judge, who observed that the applicants, had in their applications, created the impression that the heaven would fall if their prayer was not granted, only for them to refuse to attend court when it was time for them to argue the applications. However, a source close to INEC and Zinox said contrary to the claim of the judge, as at yesterday, they had not received any hearing notice from the court. Besides, the source added that they had not been given any date for the hearing of their motion for a stay of execution of the judgment neither were they served any hearing notice. He said: "After the judgment, lawyers of both parties have been going to the court daily and it was only yesterday they were able to receive the certified true copy of the judgment and got to know of the so- claimed date. "The lawyers were in court and no person mentioned to any of them anything about a hearing of the motion. So, we could not have stayed away from the court." It was learnt that the judgment had created confusion in the minds of members of the public given the fact that the N34.5 billion contracts awarded in 2010 for the purchase of the DDC machines for voters’ registration involved the use of biometrics, which other government agencies and private organisations had employed for the national identity scheme and registration of telecoms subscribers. "How can someone lays claim to owning a sole patent on biometrics when as far back as 2007, one of the affected firms had to rescue INEC? So, it is difficult to reconcile the judgment with the reality as many organisations have been employing biometrics to carry out one assignment or the other. In fact, Zinox rescued INEC in 2007 by deploying biometrics to safeguard the conduct of that year's elections," a source familiar with the case said.