Electoral Reforms (2) To Be or Not To Be? By Nasir El-Rufai

Our first installment 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 Yaradua 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 overemphasized. 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 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
percent 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 centers
and then thumb-printing
‘spare’ ballots made
available to the favored
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 materialize 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 6 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 maneuver 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 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
(NASS) should endeavor 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
realize 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 centers 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’
licenses 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 favor 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?

#CONSENSUS 2015