Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai
Our first instalment on electoral reforms ran through the history of
elections in Nigeria, the definition of free and fair elections and the
inherent flaws in the process. It was in the light of these flaws that
the late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua initiated the reform of the
electoral system with the inauguration of the Justice Uwais Electoral
Reform Committee in August 2007. In spite of the committee's thoughtful
and far-reaching recommendations, only few have been implemented. Little
wonder then that as at 2011, the Nigerian ‘democracy’ was rated as
authoritarian by The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index.
This worrisome situation needs to be addressed immediately if we are to
preserve our nascent democracy.
The innumerable benefits of electoral
reforms and a sustained democracy cannot be overemphasised. Having the
right structures in place would strengthen the rule of law, provide a
platform for credible and deserving candidates to be elected, create
peace and stability in the polity and ensure that government is
accountable to its citizens. With the current situation in the country, a
major benefit of having credible elections would be the opportunity to
break the stranglehold of PDP on the country since the return to
civilian governance in 1999; given the party has grown more and more
venal since 2007!
The elections conducted in 2011 were one of the most
fraudulent and resulted in widespread violence, loss of lives and
mayhem across the country.
The electoral malpractices were so flagrant to the extent that in the
South-east and South-south zones, observers were chased away and
'election results' reflected almost twice the average number of voters’
turnout in the rest of the country. Worse still, the ruling party's
candidate in the presidential elections was credited with over 90 per
cent of the total votes in several of those states. INEC also
experienced major logistical challenges due to the tight timelines of
the 2011 elections. For instance, in many places, voting did not start
at allotted times due to late delivery of election materials. So many
such logistic and technical issues were witnessed around the country.

The electoral fraud that took place in 2011 was mostly achieved by
altering the polling unit results when they got to collation centres and
then thumb-printing 'spare' ballots made available to the favoured
party - to justify the alterations in preparation for the election
tribunal. Massive amounts of money were then deployed on INEC officials,
lawyers and judges to apply technicalities and mind-games to uphold the
electoral fraud at the tribunal and appellate courts.
This democratic
experiment is being pushed into a cul-de-sac that may lead to its
premature demise as a result of the uncaring attitude of INEC, the
corruption of the security agencies and the impunity of the ruling
party.
The critical nexus that is often overlooked by the electoral fraudsters
is that without public office holders being legitimately elected by the
people and therefore genuinely accountable to them, our potentials and
hope for a country where things function minimally will never
materialise for even those in power. What can we do to stem these? The
answers are largely in implementing the Uwais Committee report.
The
first step would be to build truly democratic institutions. It is
essential for the various arms of government to judiciously carry out
their respective functions and serve as checks and balances on one
another.
The judiciary in particular needs to be truly unbiased in the
performance of its duties. If it is, election petition tribunals will
not drag beyond 180 days after elections. Given the foregoing, elections
to the position of governors and president should be conducted at least
six months before the expiration of their tenures and petitions
concluded with the rightful candidate been sworn in at the right time as
Uwais recommended.

In the determination of election petitions, the constitution needs
to be amended to shift the burden of proof in electoral disputes from
the petitioners to INEC. It would be recalled that in the last
presidential elections, the burden of proof on the appellant gave room
for the PDP and INEC to manoeuvre their way out of the CPC appeal in the
Presidential Election Tribunal. All efforts to gain access to electoral
materials and the database as required by Section 77 of the Electoral
Act, 2010 were thwarted by INEC thereby violating the law. While the CPC
worked tirelessly to acquire proof of rigging and fraud from the INEC
database, the NJC-PDP-INEC cabal connived to unconstitutionally remove
the President of the Court of Appeal– Justice Ayo Salami. Even after
getting away with the electoral heist, Salami remains on unlawful
suspension.
The executive arm must be separated completely from INEC
in order to guarantee the latter’s autonomy.
Most importantly, the president should not have powers to
single-handedly appoint or remove the INEC Chairman. The process
recommended by Uwais for appointment of INEC Chairman starts with the
National Judicial Council (NJC) advertising to the public and spelling
out the required qualifications. After receiving the applications, three
persons are short-listed and the nominations sent to the Council of
State to select one person to be forwarded to the Senate for
confirmation. Removal of the chairman or commissioners of INEC should be
on the recommendation of the NJC and approval by two-thirds of the
Senate which shall include at least 10 members of minority parties.

The legislature, on its part must ensure that it works diligently and
speedily to amend the Electoral Act and the constitution as early as
possible in 2013 to ensure free and fair 2015 elections. The National
Assembly should endeavour to pass an Uwais Electoral Reform Bill that
would restructure the electoral process for the benefit of our
people.
An effort at electoral reforms would be futile if the
electorate is not genuinely independent. How can this independence be
achieved? By empowering the people with education, sources of livelihood
and basic necessities so they can exercise their free will which cannot
be easily thwarted by greedy politicians.
Once people are empowered, they will vote based on informed assessment
of candidates' capability and experience as opposed to religious or
ethnic sentiments. They will realise that true brotherhood does not lie
in sharing the same state of origin but in people who will work to
secure their lives and those of their children.
The logistical
problems within INEC need to be solved and there is no better time than
now to begin planning. Issues like election materials arriving late from
Japan as was the case in the last elections are unacceptable.
Attempting to register the expected 80 million-plus voters in three
weeks will not happen. Using open source software and untested AFIS
engines for "biometric" data capture won't cut it.
Open voting booths to enable voters show ballots for payment before
voting is unlawful. Virtual polling units to facilitate rigging must be
abolished. All preparations need to be made and materials must be
delivered to all polling units without delay. The restriction of
movement of citizens a day before elections which has enabled security
agencies and the ruling party to move freely and plan the rigging is not
only unlawful and unconstitutional but also unjust.
In summary, the game should be up for those who plan to rig, or
facilitate rigging.
Some schools of thought believe that electronic
voting may be the solution to problems such as ballot box snatching and
massive thumb printing by individuals to justify false vote records. In
fact, the Uwais Report recommended that the Electoral Act be amended to
lift prohibition on the use of electoral machines. As much as this seems
like an implausible idea, a voting machine costing about $30 each has
worked in India so similar rudimentary electronic systems could be
employed to supplant the paper ballot system.
At the very least, technologies exist to encrypt results from each
polling unit and send them to an electronic collation platform via the
3G networks all over the country. This would eliminate paper-based
collation centres and their susceptibility to manipulation. 
The key
pointers for electoral reforms are clear and visible. What is less
visible is the fact that government has no interest and certainly no
intention to reform the chaotic and unregulated bazaars we call
elections. In the mad course of ‘elections’, party internal democracy is
ignored, hundreds of billions of naira of public funds are used as
slush funds, 'fuel subsidy' licences and import duty waivers granted to
ruling party apparatchiks, some domestic observers are compromised while
foreign observers are hoodwinked.
INEC is being told that its so-called autonomy is a joke, as the police
and security agencies become ruling party's agents and not
surprisingly, the elections are rigged in favour of the highest bidders.
Even the so-called state "independent" electoral commissions are beyond
redemption and should be abolished. Their functions can be handled by a
reformed INEC.
The end result - violent visits to the homes and
businesses of the suspected riggers, arson, destruction and deaths that
have happened in 1965, 1983, 1993 and 2011 - and these must stop. 
If
we are unhappy with the state of Nigeria today, if we desire to solve
our security, unemployment and infrastructural challenges and put an end
to the massive graft and ineptitude we see in our nation; if we want to
build a country we can be proud of, the process must begin with genuine
reforms of our electoral processes.
What is at stake is too important to be left to the whims of a
do-little government where even the most basic decision leads to
Hamlet’s debacle: To be, or not to be?
This Day
No comments:
Post a Comment