By Oscarline Onwuemenyi
Nigeria’s fourth successive general elections since the return of democracy in 1999 were held last April. Expectedly, numerous bodies including civil society groups who played key roles in ensuring effective participation of the citizens in the electoral process and that its outcomes were credible and acceptable, have taken a backward look at the electoral experience, taking stock, with a view to creating a pathway for sustainable and wholesome democratic elections for the country.
At a recent lesson sharing parley by Civil Society Organisations,CSOs, and Democratic Governance Development,DGD, partners, organised by Alliance for Credible Elections, ACE, in Abuja, which also marked the presentation of the Observation Report on the 2011 Voters’ Registration, issues regarding electoral reform and identified gaps in the electoral system were brought into sharp focus, with the strong recommendation that it was not yet time for national rejoicing.
Indeed, the mood of the discussants was captured in the comments of a former Chief Justice of the Federation, Justice Mohammed Uwais, who had borne the onerous task of heading the Committee on Electoral Reforms that set the tone for a review of the electoral culture of the nation. According to Uwais, the success of the last elections was no reason for stakeholders to rest on their oars but that a lot of work was still needed before the nation could attain perfect election.
He said: “Although the 2011 general elections have been adjudged free and fair, it is by no means without shortcomings. The desire of Nigerians, of course, is to attain perfect election. However, nowhere in the world is there a perfect election. It is sufficient if 85 to 100 per cent is attained. I am of the opinion that the elections were free and fair, but all the same there were some shortcomings which we need to correct before we can attain perfect elections.”
Uwais added that government had ignored some very important recommendations by the Committee on Electoral Reforms, regarding the setting up of an Electoral Offences Commission to check perpetrators of electoral violence. “There are quite a number of very important recommendations in the report we made which did not receive fair attention. One of them is our recommendation on the setting up of an Electoral Offences Commission. We have observed that our elections are always accompanied by violence, whether before the elections or after. What has happened during and after the conduct of the last elections was really sad.
He said: “We learnt from one report that over 800 persons lost their lives due to electoral violence. If the government is really interested in the sanctity of the lives of its citizens, there can be no better reason to set up the commission so as to bring justice to those who lost their lives during the elections.”
At the presentation of the report, ACE’s Deputy General Secretary, Mr. Echezona Asuzu, told Sunday Vanguard that much as the elections were considered in vast quarters to be a significant improvement on previously held elections, especially since the restoration of democracy in 1999, it is clearly obvious that a lot still needs to be done.
He said: “As very active players in the field of the last electoral cycle, we hope that this event will provide a rich reservoir of knowledge, experience and lessons that will not only consolidate already realised democratic gains but also help in charting a better course into future elections.
“It is perhaps most apt at this point to remind us that the gale of violence that almost blighted the last general elections is a wake-up call that elections in themselves cannot be an end.
The fact remains that until the electioneering process avails itself as means to credible leadership succession, good governance, mass oriented social services delivery, respect for the rule of law and public accountability then the kind of success that was recorded with the 2011 elections would always be pyrrhic.”
According to him, as the nation prepares to engage another electoral cycle, it was pertinent for stakeholders to examine losses and gains that arose from our recent interventions within the democratic space, especially in lieu of current realities and in line with the expectations of a majority of Nigerians. This kind of retrospection, he stressed, is expected to dwell essentially on the need or otherwise for further electoral reform, constitutional amendment and robust engagement of the governance process.
He stated that, “Based on some of the shared experiences prior, during and after the 2011 elections, the finer questions confronting us might include: Is there need for further electoral reform and perhaps commensurate constitutional amendment in order to engender more transparent elections in 2015 and beyond, especially with regard to the review of extant laws that tend to reduce public confidence on Nigeria’s electoral and or democratic process?
Is there need for INEC restructuring in order to make the electoral management body conform to global best practices, strengthen its internal dynamics and meet the expectations of the average Nigerian citizenry as a truly independent, efficient, non-partisan and fearless organisation?
In its recommendations, the report wondered if there were aspects in our criminal law system that needed to be reformed to mitigate some of the security and or electoral challenges encountered before, during and after the elections.
According to it, “Based on the political campaigns and voting pattern prior to and during the 2011 elections, can we describe politics in Nigeria as issue- based? Was the structure, power relation and role of security agencies during the last general elections in conformity with best practices, encourage participation by the electorate and discourage electoral malpractices?
ACE was supported by Democratic Governance for Development,DGD, project to monitor the nation-wide voter registration carried out by Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, in February. The UNDP-managed DGD project is a partnership of the European Union, EU, DFID, CIDA, KOICA and UNDP. It was designed in response to the priorities of the Nigerian government for an improved electoral process through an electoral cycle support and deepening democracy approach.
The DGD project is a continuation of the support to Nigeria’s electoral process essentially by the same like-minded development partners that supported the 2007 elections through the Joint Donor Basket Fund, JDBF. While the elections of 1999 and 2003 had brought into bold relief the democracy deficits that have characterised Nigeria’s elections since the inauguration of the Fourth Republic, the 2007 elections have been widely described as the country’s worst in her post-independence existence. Against this historical background, stakes were very high for the conduct of credible elections in 2011 to restore the confidence of citizens in the electoral process.
Even more important was the realisation that consolidating democracy through improved credibility of the elections is intertwined with broader issues of governance in Nigeria including service delivery and attainment of the Millennium Development Goals,MDGs.
Although the original version of the report was prepared before the election, it was published after the election. For this reason, the recommendations which were directly concerned with the 2011 general election may have been overtaken by events and would look out of place in a post-election publication. According to the Secretary General of ACE, Mr. Emma Ezeazu, “We have retained them (recommendations) as in the original, partly because we had shared them with relevant stakeholders before the election and partly because they are still relevant in addressing long-term goals of improving the conduct of elections in the country.
“In particular is the fact that some of the problems occasioned in the elections were the result of the failure to attend to the recommendations which have convinced us the more that such actions as called for by the recommendations are important in improving the quality of elections in the country.”
