尼日利亚选举法庭在选举请愿方面的职能

Chinwe Egbunike-Umegbolu, Uriah Bajela
{"title":"尼日利亚选举法庭在选举请愿方面的职能","authors":"Chinwe Egbunike-Umegbolu, Uriah Bajela","doi":"10.30958/ajl.8-4-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper scrutinises whether it is possible to have Court-Connected Alternative Dispute Resolution, hereinafter ADR, to cover election petitions in Nigeria. An election petition is a peculiar breed of adversarial matters litigated over in courts, which is exclusively created for the sole purpose of reaching a speedy resolution within the allocated time frame provided by the law. There are no provisions, under the extant legal framework for elections and election disputes in Nigeria, for the use of court-connected ADR to resolve or settle election disputes. The zero-sum nature of Nigerian politics, characterised as the winner takes all; the loser takes none, coupled with the fact that elections are prone to violence and corruption because the seats for grabs are very lucrative- government positions make election disputes unarguably unsuitable for ADR mechanisms. However, the ADR strategy of looking at the interests of the parties rather than at their positions may hold some hope for applying ADR options to election disputes. An interest-based perspective to resolving disputes holds more promise than the traditional position-based perspective. Hence, the paper will analyse what the election tribunal does and whether it has ever used ADR as an option in its history. If not, what hopes are held out that Court-Connected ADR or induced ADR could ever be introduced to disputes concerning an area hotly contested as an election petition? The paper employs qualitative, primary and secondary resources to tackle the above-stated questions. Keywords: Alternative Dispute Resolution; Election Tribunal; Election Petition; Political Parties and Nigeria.","PeriodicalId":184533,"journal":{"name":"ATHENS JOURNAL OF LAW","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Functionality of the Election Tribunal in Nigeria concerning Election Petition\",\"authors\":\"Chinwe Egbunike-Umegbolu, Uriah Bajela\",\"doi\":\"10.30958/ajl.8-4-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper scrutinises whether it is possible to have Court-Connected Alternative Dispute Resolution, hereinafter ADR, to cover election petitions in Nigeria. An election petition is a peculiar breed of adversarial matters litigated over in courts, which is exclusively created for the sole purpose of reaching a speedy resolution within the allocated time frame provided by the law. There are no provisions, under the extant legal framework for elections and election disputes in Nigeria, for the use of court-connected ADR to resolve or settle election disputes. The zero-sum nature of Nigerian politics, characterised as the winner takes all; the loser takes none, coupled with the fact that elections are prone to violence and corruption because the seats for grabs are very lucrative- government positions make election disputes unarguably unsuitable for ADR mechanisms. However, the ADR strategy of looking at the interests of the parties rather than at their positions may hold some hope for applying ADR options to election disputes. An interest-based perspective to resolving disputes holds more promise than the traditional position-based perspective. Hence, the paper will analyse what the election tribunal does and whether it has ever used ADR as an option in its history. If not, what hopes are held out that Court-Connected ADR or induced ADR could ever be introduced to disputes concerning an area hotly contested as an election petition? The paper employs qualitative, primary and secondary resources to tackle the above-stated questions. Keywords: Alternative Dispute Resolution; Election Tribunal; Election Petition; Political Parties and Nigeria.\",\"PeriodicalId\":184533,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ATHENS JOURNAL OF LAW\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ATHENS JOURNAL OF LAW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30958/ajl.8-4-7\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ATHENS JOURNAL OF LAW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30958/ajl.8-4-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文审查是否有可能有法院连接的替代性争议解决,以下ADR,以涵盖选举请愿在尼日利亚。选举请愿是在法庭上提起诉讼的一种特殊的对抗性事项,它的唯一目的是在法律规定的分配时间范围内迅速达成解决方案。在尼日利亚现有的选举和选举纠纷法律框架下,没有规定使用与法院有关的ADR来解决或解决选举纠纷。尼日利亚政治的零和本质(以赢家通吃为特征);失败者一无所获,再加上选举容易发生暴力和腐败的事实,因为争夺的席位非常有利可图——政府职位使得选举纠纷毫无疑问不适合ADR机制。然而,关注当事人利益而非其立场的ADR策略可能为将ADR选项应用于选举纠纷带来一些希望。以利益为基础的观点比传统的以立场为基础的观点更有希望解决争端。因此,本文将分析选举法庭做了什么,以及它在历史上是否曾将ADR作为一种选择。如果不是这样,那么在涉及选举请愿等争议激烈的领域的纠纷中引入法院关联ADR或诱导ADR的希望又有多大呢?本文运用定性的、一手的和第二手的资源来解决上述问题。关键词:替代性争议解决;选举法庭;选举请愿书;政党和尼日利亚。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Functionality of the Election Tribunal in Nigeria concerning Election Petition
This paper scrutinises whether it is possible to have Court-Connected Alternative Dispute Resolution, hereinafter ADR, to cover election petitions in Nigeria. An election petition is a peculiar breed of adversarial matters litigated over in courts, which is exclusively created for the sole purpose of reaching a speedy resolution within the allocated time frame provided by the law. There are no provisions, under the extant legal framework for elections and election disputes in Nigeria, for the use of court-connected ADR to resolve or settle election disputes. The zero-sum nature of Nigerian politics, characterised as the winner takes all; the loser takes none, coupled with the fact that elections are prone to violence and corruption because the seats for grabs are very lucrative- government positions make election disputes unarguably unsuitable for ADR mechanisms. However, the ADR strategy of looking at the interests of the parties rather than at their positions may hold some hope for applying ADR options to election disputes. An interest-based perspective to resolving disputes holds more promise than the traditional position-based perspective. Hence, the paper will analyse what the election tribunal does and whether it has ever used ADR as an option in its history. If not, what hopes are held out that Court-Connected ADR or induced ADR could ever be introduced to disputes concerning an area hotly contested as an election petition? The paper employs qualitative, primary and secondary resources to tackle the above-stated questions. Keywords: Alternative Dispute Resolution; Election Tribunal; Election Petition; Political Parties and Nigeria.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信