While we acknowledge the provision of section 218(1) of the Constitution which gives the President the power to determine the operational use of the armed forces as well as the similar provisions of section 8 of the Armed Forces Act Cap A20, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, it is indisputable that the operational use as may be determined by the President still has to be within the scope of the purpose of establishing the armed forces as enumerated in section 217 of the 1999 Constitution.

It is our position further that if the drafters of the 1999 Constitution intended the President’s power to determine the operational use of the armed forces as unbridled, they would not have stated the purpose of the establishment of the armed forces in section 217 of the 1999 Constitution in such limited terms. In this regard, the Supreme Court has held that in interpreting the provisions of the Constitution, the sections are never to be read in isolation. In Lafia Local Government v. Gov. Nasarawa State [2012] 17 NWLR (Pt. 1328) 94 at 126, paras. D-E, Rhodes-Vivour, JSC held thus:

“Interpretation of sections of the Constitution reveals the intention of the Legislature, and so sections of the Constitution are never to be read in isolation. They should be interpreted in a way that on no account should one section defeat the intent of another section.”
In the same case of Lafia Local Govt. at page 138, para. H, Fabiyi, JSC noted that:

“… related sections of the Constitution ought to be interpreted together so as to produce a harmonious result.”
The Court of Appeal, way back in 2005, gave effect to this submission of ours when in Yusuf v. Obasanjo [2005] 18 NWLR (Pt. 956) 96 it pronounced as follows:

“It is up to the police to protect our nascent democracy and not the military, otherwise the democracy might be wittingly or unwittingly militarised. This is not what the citizenry bargained for in wrestling power from the military in 1999. Conscious step or steps should be taken to civilianise the polity to ensure the survival and sustenance of democracy.”

The same Court of Appeal in the later case of Buhari v. Obasanjo (2005) 1 WRN 1 @ 200 maintained in clear and unambiguous terms that
“In spite of the non-tolerant nature and behaviours of our political class in this country, we should by all means try to keep armed personnel of whatever status or nature from being part and parcel of our electoral process. The civilian authorities should be left to conduct and carry out fully the electoral processes at all levels.”

It is interesting to note that the Supreme Court did not shy away from this issue in the same case of Buhari v. Obasanjo [2005] 13 NWLR (Pt. 941) 1 @ 300 – 301, where the apex Court condemned the use of soldiers for electoral process in lucid language and enjoined that it is the duty of the government to guarantee that

“That in this day age in this country that has been independent for 45 years we can still witness horrendous acts by security officers who ought to dutifully ensure peace and tranquillity in the election process suddenly turning themselves into agents of destruction, and introduce mayhem to what ordinarily would have been a civilised way of exercising franchise by the people who are sovereign, is regrettable. I ascribe the nefarious activities of thugs and a few security officers and party men to lack of understanding of the philosophy and ethics behind election in a democratic state and lack of understanding of the dynamics of election process…. There must be statewide enlightenment programme educating the masses as to their rights as to how the citizens who are sovereign can exercise their franchise freely, unmolested and undisturbed.”

Despite the above pronouncements of the courts of the land, it speaks of abnormality and lunatic syndrome to find government still deploying soldiers in order to rig elections for its favoured candidates while shamelessly professing allegiance to the hallowed principles of rule of law. The imposition of terror is certainly aimed at making the election less participatory and to enhance chances for certain untowards activities to be perpetrated under the cover of military paraphernalia. We strongly condemn this in unbridled terms and yours faithfully was a victim of military highhandedness on the day of the election in Osun as I was subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment by military men while attempting to exit the State. While I would not go into the details of this development, I must notify you that I have filed an action at the Federal High Court, Osogbo for the protection of my fundamental rights in this regard.
We must remember that the High Court of Anambra State recently awarded damages in favour of Mallam Nasir El-Rufai due to infringements similar to mine perpetrated by security personnel on the day of the Anambra governorship election. We definitely cannot continue this way and expect to be recognised among civilised countries of the world. There must be an end to this impunity whoever might be responsible for it.

Politics of ‘Stomach Infrastructure’
In the course of all these and noticing the failures attending their efforts, the Federal Government and the PDP marauders in the State of Osun and those recruited from other States, introduced electorate bribery in the name of what they called ‘stomach infrastructure’ in which they started distributing rice and kerosene to the people. PDP enlisted the support of a number of derelict renegades from some other States who bankrolled the process. While a huge sum of 10 billion Naira was reportedly made available by the Federal Government for the campaign of the PDP candidate and electoral bribery of the masses, they opened a luciferous money-for-soul business in which they started distributing money to the people in order to secure their votes. They made spirited efforts to discredit the government of Aregbesola but the popularity of this master strategist kept on growing in leaps and bounds as the masses kept on renewing their pledge of solidarity to him on a daily basis. Many people collected the money, rice and kerosene being shared by PDP but refused to vote against their conscience.