|
One conclusion that can be
drawn from the large turnouts and enthusiastic presentations at the public
sittings of the Electoral Review Committee (ERC) held across the federation
over the last few weeks is that Nigerians are totally fed up with elections
that are manipulated and outcomes that are at variance with the wishes of the
people. The prevailing anxiety for a transparent electoral process is buoyed by
widespread appreciation of the multifarous problems that engender electoral
malfeasance: presenter after presenter catalogued the maladies in the electoral
process and, with astonishing consistency, pointed out the way forward.
The topical issues about
which the most strindent and repeated calls were made by state governments,
political parties, professional bodies, traditional institutions, religious
groups, trade unions, security agencies, NGOs, and individuals that appeared at
the various venues of the ERC sittings included the issue of the autonomy of
the Independent Electoral Commission (INEC) and the appointment of it’s
helmsman. Many presenters harped, quite rightly, on the need to take the
institution saddled with the responsibility for the conduct of the election
away from the influence of the executive arm of government. To do this, the
general opinion was that the funding of INEC should be charged direct to the
consolidated revenue fund. This would release the commission from the whims and
caprices of an executive arm of government that is at all material times an
interested party in electoral combats.
An amendment of the laws
with provisions for INEC to be headed by a retired justice of the Supreme
Court, for membership of the commission to be reserved for non-partisan persons
of impeccable integrity, for independent candidates to be recognized, to peg
political parties to a minimum of two or a maximum of five and for the adoption
of “Option A4” (modified open/secret ballot system) were also widely canvassed.
While, some argued that delimiting the number of political parties would
constitute an infringement of constitutional rights of citizens, many averred
that a great percentage of the political parties in Nigeria exist in name only
– and are virtually kept alive not by any membership commitments but by the
largess which the unnecessary fiscal grant by the federal and state governments
to political parties constitutes.
Another issue of
widespread concern was the interminable duration of election petitions. While
petitions linger, impostors occupy public offices – and eventually use it to
legitimize their position. Worse still, the statutory provisions for uniform
conduct of particular elections contained in S. 48 of the Electoral Act 2006 and
S. 180(2) (b) of the 1999 CFRN have been blasted because by virtue of the
landmark decision of the Supreme Court in Peter Obi v INEC, the tenure of
Governors who were sworn in the aftermath of elections nullified or ordered by
the Court of Appeal will now end at varying times. Elections thereto cannot,
therefore, be held “at the same time and place in the federation”. The way out,
for many, is to ensure that general elections are conducted three to six months
before the prescribed date of swearing in so that all election petitions and
appeals can be disposed of before the swearing in of elected persons. And any
person howsoever elected after the swearing in date should be considered to be
serving out the term as if they were sworn in on the prescribed swearing in
date.
Concerning the so-called
State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIECs), the general opinion was that
these contraptions be scrapped and legislated out of existence having failed to
meet the vision behind their establishment. The SIECs were found to be
vulnerable to manipulation by the appointing authority - the Governor and the
ruling party in their various states. To restore the integrity of the electoral
process at the grassroots levels, the consensus was that the duties of SIECs be
reverted to INEC which, not being under the apron strings of state authorities,
is better placed to provide a level playing field for all candidates.
The absence of internal
democracy in the political parties was also placed on the chopping block. In
particular, the predilection to “consensus candidates” was seen as an
abbreviation the democratic process which facilitated the imposition of
candidates and the subordination of the will of the people to the wishes of
those who control the party. Given the provisions of S. 133(a) and 179(a) of
the 1999 CFRN, which stipulate that even when one candidate emerges for the
office of President or Governor prior to an election, the popularity of such
candidate must be determined through the ballot box, the general view was that
the only acceptable “consensus” should be the consensus of the ballot box.
Of course, some of the
problems identified as hamstringing the electoral process and some of the
recommendations made at the ERC sittings will require constitutional amendments
to implement. But it must be clear that in matters of elections, the process is
as important - if not more important - than the outcome. If, therefore, it
becomes necessary to amend the constitution in order to ensure that the desire
of the people to have sustenable democracy is realized, public expectation will
be that the members of the National Assembly see that the requisite amendments
are made expeditiously. Afterall, the reason why they are in congress in the
first place is to effectuate the wishes of the people.
As the ERC begins to sieve
the grains from the inevitable chaff in the myriad presentations which it has
received, there is reasonable apprehension in the polity: Nigeria
has a poor record of utilizing the recommendations of panels or committees
which are set up to investigate one national malady or the other. The
presidency is generally regarded as a burial ground where painstakingly written
reports the pages of which hold the proactive solutions to national challenges
are allowed to gather dust. This fate must not befall the report of the ERC.
The countdown to the 2011 election has already begun. If there is any legacy
that the Yar’Adua administration can leave for the nation, it is to adopt
whatever measures and institute whatever framework that is necessary to ensure
that in 2011 and all subsequent elections, the wishes of the people prevail.
All said, how much any
electoral reform in Nigeria
will succeed will depend on how far the attitude of the people can also be
reformed to see the ballot box as the ultimate arbiter in electoral matters. It
will also, to a great extent, depend on how far the members of the national
assembly will be prepared to go in order to put a statutory restraint on the
illogical activities of the Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal
Commission which has transformed public office in Nigeria
into a lotto that guarantees instant wealth.
uchebush@yahoo.com;
0805 1090 050
|
Posted by Robot| 25.06.2008 11:04