Maurice Iwu, Nigeria’s Independent Electoral Commission (INEC) chairman, continues to be pummelled by those disenchanted with the various elections conducted by INEC since 2007. Not left out are many who wittingly or unwittingly created Nigeria’s electoral impasse, they have now thrown themselves into the ring. Is Iwu being made the scapegoat or did he transform himself to that?

There is the general belief that from 2007 till date, election rigging, election violence, mass killings before, during, and after elections, election courts, and other election-related problems have reached dimensions not seen since Nigeria’s return to democracy in 1999. The ghost of ‘elections 2007’ simply refused to go away. The honest ones among many that benefited from the farcical elections of 2007 had condemned the exercise. The greatest beneficiary, President Umar Yar'Adua had not only punched holes on that election but had since set up an electoral reforms committee. The 2007 elections brought many detractions from the gains made since Nigeria’s return to democracy – a vanishing opposition group or groups and a deteriorating security situation in the country.

A democracy without an active, strong and consistent opposition is as good as military dictatorship. In many cases the former has been proved to be worse than the latter. Again, the stability, safety of lives and property and development in any democracy are all hinged on the credibility of its electoral process, and by extension, on those placed by the process onto leadership positions. Until the 1990’s the Institutional Revolutionary Party (Pri) held sway in Mexico for more than seven decades and brooked little or no opposition. And for most of the period, election fraud, corrupt practices, wanton robberies, kidnappings for ransom, daring escapes of its citizens across the border to the United States and other forms of criminality also became institutionalised in Mexico. Election rigging can with a jet speed breed a class of politicians and public servants who work in tandem to sustain within any democracy the twin cultures of vice and impunity. We pray hard Iwu’s INEC may not take Nigeria this far?  

After the 2007 election fiasco, honest Nigerians expected that Maurice Iwu would resign from office and spiritedly defend himself by highlighting all those factors known by many of us as institutionalised obstacles that if not addressed must always weigh against free and fair elections in Nigeria. The Justice Uwais electoral reforms committee is recommending the A4 Option voting system similar to that of the Ibrahim Babangida era. It appears like a palliative for now. But to whatever extent we hope Nigeria’s democratic climate must have improved since 1993, we all know that not much has changed in our federal structure under which the election results the option nurtured in 1993 failed to be actualised. It is not just enough to proscribe one electoral system and prescribe another, what is imperative is the restructuring of our political system and political offices in tune with modern day workable democracies where political office holders are unable to use their positions to amass wealth at the expense of the governed. If an administrative structure and revenue sharing formula befitting a complex federation like Nigeria is devised in the ongoing constitution review exercise and the Option A4 electoral system applied in the 2011 elections, much of the electoral chaos of today may be drastically reduced.

Nigerians expect an attitudinal change from Maurice Iwu. His failure so far to assure Nigerians that 2011 is going to be far better than 2007 is giving people goose pimples. It is also providing the pedestal on which others who are expected to be blamed as well for Nigeria’s electoral woes stand to cast stones toward his direction. For now, Nigerians expect Iwu’s INEC to dig deep and expose, for the benefit of the existing constitution review committee, those factors in our political arrangement that negate the conduct of free and fair elections in the country, for if Nigeria goes to the next general elections without first carrying out an overhaul of its political system the country may be shaken to its foundations. Today’s INEC must ensure that the year 2011 marks a watershed in Nigeria’s history of elections.

MAURICE IWU’S POLITICS

After the electoral fiasco of 2007 Maurice Iwu refused to quit INEC, but going by his actions and inaction as well as his utterances since then, he had left many to believe that Nigeria’s progressive descent to electoral chaos may have a lot to do with his beliefs and attitude rather than the “Nigerian factor” alone.

By ever comparing Nigeria’s electoral system, more so, as symbolised by the 2007 elections supervised by him to the near-perfect US electoral system as manifested in the November 2008 elections, Iwu can be likened to that kind of leader who believes that the led must either be blindfolded or brainwashed and told that snow is black not white, that coal is white not black and expected to be towed along.

A few days after the courts upturned another of INEC’s election results, this time in Edo state, Iwu went to the head of the Catholic church in his native Okigwe diocese, Imo state, perhaps seeking for an ex-cathedra pronouncement on his infallibility as the nation’s chief electoral umpire. For some of his guest speakers on that occasion, equating Iwu’s success to the smooth transfer of political power through the elections conducted by the INEC he heads was a very sweet song. For them the unfairness of the elections that brought that transition was not important. Many of those speakers ended up getting characterised by observers as exponents of mediocrity. Some questioned whether the INEC chairman ever gave a second thought or not as to what Nigeria’s political atmosphere may turn to if every political office holder in the country opts to hold such a thanksgiving jamboree? Anyhow, a few days after the church fiesta, more than 400 people died of election-related ethnic conf1ict in Jos, Plateau state.

On April 14, 2007, the gubernatorial and state house of assembly elections were both conducted at the same time in all the electoral wards in Imo state. Iwu’s local INEC citing violence in some polling areas cancelled the gubernatorial election result a candidate from Owerri could have won but went ahead to uphold the state assembly election results. INEC could have unleashed anarchy in the state but for the general understanding in Imo state that the next governor then must come from Okigwe zone.

Not long ago, Iwu was accused by people from his Southeast zone of hiding under INEC’s constituency delineation exercise to meddle in the politics of state creation in the zone. He was specifically accused of conscripting areas to front for a state carved out from the existing five states in the Southeast zone with Okigwe as the headquarters. If Iwu denied the accusations, what immediately followed the senatorial constituency delineation exercise in Imo state did underscore the lie in his denial. Three obviously syndicated, well-known propagandists immediately flooded print and on-line media outlets in chronological order with articles extolling Iwu and the merits of a sixth state carved out from all the Southeast states in the Okigwe area. A self-styled public affairs analyst, Yakubu Tsav, in an article published in countless publishing outfits and titled: “Games Igbos play with their sons”, www.vanguardngr.com/content/view/22040/87/ chastised the Igbos for not realising that Iwu is their highest political office holder; and that all the political office holders in today’s Nigeria owe their positions to Iwu’s transition elections; and therefore, Iwu’s privileged access to any body at any level in Nigeria and elsewhere indicates that he is the only one who has the political leverage to get them the additional state they crave so much.

Another well known propagandist, Aloysius Ejimakor, wrote that cultural/linguistic affinity must not be put into consideration when carving out a new state he called Igboezue from the five states in the Southeast, and that all the other groups asking for states in the Southeast were selfish, hence, according to him, “..to now allow some sectarian group to take the bacon (the sixth state) home ..will tantamount to some sort of political fraud on the larger Igbo ..”

For the hind sight, since the 2005 political reforms conference when one state agitation group in the Southeast presented its request, the flagrant use of such words as “selfish” and “fraud” had rarely characterised the relationship between the state agitation groups in the zone. True, none of the groups may succeed without the support of the rest of the Igbo, and in fact, the rest of Nigeria, however, it did not appear to Ejimakor that hiding under the mantra of “collective Igbo struggle” - however deceptive that is - to ask for a jumbling of mostly unwilling interest groups from the five states in contemporary Southeast zone to form a state for Okigwe’s sake is flawed. And when the move is largely seen as associated with the signature of a single politician looking for an undeserved reward from the people, the smell of fraud and selfishness fills the air.

The weakest link among the propagandists, Emma Ogbeche, canvassed that attention must not be paid to the claims of large population by the Aba and Njaba state groups, and that it is ideal for the interests of every Igbo man to locate the new state ‘on the near virgin territory’ extracted from the existing five states in the Southeast with Okigwe as its headquarters.

The outpouring of condemnations for the proposal and its proponents was instant and total. People were mostly irked that the same Okigwe zone which had benefited from practically all the past state creation exercises in the Southeast would pop up again. When the old Imo state was split in1991to get Abia and Imo states, the then Okigwe senatorial dstrict in the then Imo state had one part of it go to Abia state and the remainder to Imo state; a few years later, in 1996 to be precise, Ebonyi state was created and, again, the part of the old Okigwe zone in Abia state was split, one part went to Ebonyi state and the remainder retained in Abia state. Today, people in the pre-August 1991 Okigwe senatorial zone are spread in Imo, Abia and Ebonyi states based on their numerous distinguishable affinities to the other existing populations in those states. So why would any one opt to crave, or carve out another state, for the third time with the Okigwe area in focus, when in the Southeast zone there are those three well entrenched state agitation groups namely: Aba, Adada, and Njaba any of which can comfortably pass the constitutional requirements for a state, and whose people believe they are yet to benefit from any of the past state creation exercises in the zone? Besides, two of these three state agitation groups contend they fall within the oil producing areas with their well known ecological problems, so contemplating in place of their demands a state as Igboezue carved out from the five states in the Southeast and located in the most thinly populated area of the zone; and whose sole means of sustenance shall be federal doles is like contemplating robbing Peter to pay Paul. Above all, unless constrained or induced, the groups enumerated by those propagandists to form such a state from the five states of the Southeast can never come together in contemporary Igbo land to ask for a state of their own.

The fact is that if the INEC boss gets mired in local politics he loses sight of the reality that the future of Nigeria depends a lot on his office.

Benedict Okereke

obenox@yahoo.com

Robot  # 1 | 17.12.2008 02:03

Maurice Iwu, Nigeria’s Independent Electoral Commission (INEC) chairman, continues to be pummelled by those disenchanted with the various elections conducted by INEC since 2007. Not left out are many who wittingly or unwittingly created Nigeria’s electoral impasse, they have now thrown themselves into the ring. Is Iwu being made the scapegoat or did he transform himself to that? There is the general belief that from 2007 till date, election rigging, election violence, mass killings before, during, and after elections, election courts, and other election-related problems have reached dimensions not seen since Nigeria’s return to democracy in 1999. The ghost of ‘elections 2007’ simply refused to go away. The honest ones among many that benefited from the farcical elections of 2007 had condemned the exercise. The greatest beneficiary, President Umar Yar'Adua had not only punched holes on that election but had sinc...Read the full article.

Law Mefor  # 2 | 17.12.2008 05:19

I personally think that ‘what went right’ in Iwu’s wuruwuru election far outweighs ‘what went wrong’. To appreciate Iwu’s wuruwuru all one needs do is choose between OBJ in ASO Rock or in Ottah farm in this grueling 2008. Iwu’ wuruwuru ensured Otta haven for Obj.I am for Obj in Otta even if it meant a form of coup which Iwu’s wuruwuru amount That is the ahcivement of Iwu’s charred elections. It was to an achievement by design, it was an achievement by default, not by design. The other fact this incisive article well articulated remains that those crying wolf now helped to lay the mines that blew the nation’s chances at free and fair election. Why didn’t the opposition – if there is – insist on Option A4, for example? Why did they not work on preempting Iwu’s wuruwuru? Why did they have to wait for this long to cry over spill milk? Why did they not see the implications of the sitting president appointing the leadership of INEC and starving them of funds? Are they even realizing where there trouble lies? Is the opposition really doing its work as a shadow government? Are they not just agitating for a place in the political space and pieces of perks? Is opposition now saying they did their work and could not muster enough evidence to prove how Yar’Adua was rigged into office? My pain with our sort of opposition is that their hullabaloos only produce for the masses brand new masters, never a meaningful change. Follow what the Democrats did in the US. After losing 8 years ago in what was clearly a manipulated electoral process in thee State of Florida, the Democrats, this time around, prepared for all eventualities. The Republicans were at a point up to their usual shenanigans but this time, they were roundly blocked, so that the wishes of the masses will may be. There is no opposition in Nigeria. Was it not Umezeoke telling the world why his party’s candidate, Buhari, was headed for doom? Where you have opposite, will it be its chair canvassing winning party’s position? Is it not absurd? But that is our lot in this clime. In fact, Iwu did well in the circumstance. And if opposition does not stand up and work, Iwu’s worst is yet to come!

uzosike  # 3 | 17.12.2008 19:07

My problem with Nigerians is that the leadxers have no shame. I was in Nigeria during the election, expecially in Umuahia capital of abia State. I represented a group of Abia Professionals in Uk, what i saw changed my perception of Nigerian Politice. IWU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF HIS UGLY SELF. HE HA NO SHAME, GOD WILL REWARD HIM HUNDRED FOLD. The people of Abia state voted for a candidate of their Choice, before most result were returned to Umuahia the Bastard and his cohourt huriddly announced onethat was written already. Now he is blaming the politicians. Why did he sonive with pIwu, just your friend and associate in Abia, you have distroyed that name for ever shame on. You may have all the money in the world, Nigerians and Abians will not forgive you for imposing the Kalu family on Abia for another night. Mandave UK

tanibaba  # 4 | 18.12.2008 10:43

The Punch Prof. Iwu and his national thanksgiving By Agency Reporter Published: Thursday, 18 Dec 2008 CERTAINLY, the fact that one saw the end of the year calls for a thanksgiving. And for a family whose matriarch added another season to her years on earth on the first day of the last but one month, it would have been dubbed ‘ingratitude’ if the members didn’t have words of thanksgiving to the Lord that made it possible. Skip to next paragraph click to expand image File Prof. Iwu and his national thanksgiving So on November 30, 2008, the chairman of Independent Election Commission, Prof. Maurice Maduakolam Iwu, called on friends and well wishers to join his family in a ‘national’ thanksgiving. It was said that the family’s yearly November thanksgiving got more pep the last three years and this year was no exception. Having midwifed the much criticised 2007 elections that produced the personalities that are in charge of the country’s fortune, Iwu needed to be grateful that he had the strength to withstand the criticisms that trailed the election that led to the emergence of the ruling class. So he gathered the powerful in the society (many of them beneficiaries of his 2007 elections). The oppressed and the local folks were not left out. They struggled to get a seat inside the venue of the much publicised event – the imposing Immaculate Conception Cathedral ground Okigwe, Imo State. During the service, the Bishop of Okigwe Catholic Dioceses, Most Rev. Solomon Amatu, said that the thanksgiving and national reception was the perfect platform for the illustrious son of Okigwe and his family who had every reason to thank God to do so. Really, Iwu and family are on course. But many have wondered at the attachment of the word, ‘national’ to his family’s thanksgiving. What is national about a thanksgiving embarked upon by a family? Indeed, it was a national honour for the Professor of Pharmacy to have been given the opportunity to husband Nigeria’s national elections but did that qualify him to embark on a ‘national’ thanksgiving? Since the synonyms for ‘national’ include nationwide, countrywide, general, universal, et cetera, many are still trying to fathom the reason why the Prof would undertake a thanksgiving on behalf of a nation – going by the meaning that many have attached to his brand of thanksgiving. Give it to him, his thanksgiving was certainly on a national scale. And the congratulatory messages that flooded daily newspapers were national in spread. From his committee of friends from the National Assembly (who many have tagged ‘Iwu’s elections beneficiaries) to others who had reasons to laugh with the chief electoral officer, and others who felt they needed to identify with the celebrants, (the Nigerian thing) adverts poured in. It is not surprising though, as Nigerians are known to felicitate with celebrants. Some congratulated him on the feat of conducting the 2007 elections! While others made do with just joining him to be happy. The penchant for spending taxpayers’ money on congratulatory media adverts has been a source of worry to many Nigerians, some of whom are daily groaning under the burden of trying to eke out a living in the country. Yet, millions of naira are daily deployed to such pedestrian projects while many children are out of school for the simple fact that their parents can not muster enough funds for school fees. It is really appalling. Observers have followed the events religiously, believing that the celebrated national thanksgiving would offer them the opportunity of hearing about the makings of the 2007 elections. They did: Iwu’s challenges in the making of the 2007 elections were brought to the fore. But, not before Rev. Amatu had offered his opinion: that Iwu’s problems were actually the negative image that he (Iwu) inherited when he became the commission’s chairman in 2005. For the cleric, the INEC helmsman achieved success in transiting Nigeria from one civilian administration to another. A stance supported by the Vice President, Goodluck Jonathan who is of the opinion that Iwu deserves garlands, not guillotine. Many have wondered why the VP who described the national thanksgiving as appropriate, would make it a point of duty to speak for the man through whose surgical expertise during the 2007 elections, he emerged the Vice President of the nation. According to the VP, the ‘unjustified’ harsh criticisms levied at Iwu were because his critics were simply ignorant of the enormity of the task he faced before and during the elections. “It is easy for people to condemn the electoral body at the centre, but look at what’s happening in the states where they have to conduct only local council elections, but here is an INEC that conducted election in 36 states and Abuja,” the VP had said. Perhaps, if the national thanksgiving had come after the Supreme Court has upheld the President’s electoral victory, Iwu would have had more reasons to celebrate, because the PDP’s legal victory is Iwu’s victory. After all, his national thanksgiving got party colouration, going by the party affiliate of the dignitaries that graced the occasion. View All (0 )Comment(s) THE BEST OF PUNCH TODAY

tanibaba  # 5 | 18.12.2008 10:55

Tory don get K-leg o for NVS. Is the problem now professor Iwu. Was Iwu the party representatives, was Iwu the courts? Was Iwu the tribunal? Did Iwu force opposition to go into an election when it was clear to them that the ballot papers were not serialised. When you partake in a faulty process can you turn round to claim reliefs (the lawyers should tell us). Did it not occur to opposition to boycott the elections has was done recently in Zimbabwe? Let the real cowards who dont know where to pass their blames and heartaches to continue to blame Prof. Iwu. I really pity them. sooner than later they will knock their heads against coconut. Lo ba tan, oro na dun o fe ke. More articles on Iwu please. You will soon make a hero out of our Prof. taslim