By Adisa Adeleye
Many lovers of Nigeria, indigenes and foreigners have advised Nigeria to get it right this time.  At the approach of all elections in April, the assumption is that the elections would be conducted in such a transparent manner that the votes of the people should reflect absolutely their choices.   But this is one aspect of the problems.

If the art of a free and fair election is to be considered, there should be a consideration of how a candidate is selected by the party, recognized by the Constitution as the only agency to field a candidate.  If a candidate is the choice of majority members of a party, that candidate would be presumed to be democratically selected for an election.  Such candidates from various parties would offer themselves for an election which INEC, as an impartial judge, would present to the electorate, referred to as voters.

As it has been shown recently through congresses of the various parties, in some cases, democratic principle of free choice has been discarded and substituted with another concept of imposition with its dire consequences – court cases and changing of political parties.

The implication of undemocratically nominated candidates presented to INEC and approved for election is the endorsement of an act which is neither free nor fair.  Even if election is clearly conducted, it is not fair.

Perhaps it may be illuminating to remind INEC once again the factors responsible for the past non credible elections in Nigeria.  They are classified as rigging or electoral malpractices in all their nefarious forms.  These manifest themselves in over voting, voting by the under-aged; intimidation of voters (by shooting in the air); inflated voters‘ registers; snatching of ballot boxes; falsified results and lately inflated results in a candidate‘s home base.

It is assumed that the recent registration of voters by mechanical devices would solve some of the problems.  The list would be the actual verification of the 63.9 million voters already registered.  It would be interesting to watch how INEC officials under Professor Jega would be able to differentiate real voters from the cattle of the North, ‘ghost‘ of the East and West and the ‘fishes‘ of the Rivers, who in the past had interfered successfully in electoral victories.  If the magical Voters‘ Register is reliable, a part of the problems is solved.

The failures in the past elections were noticeable in poor logistics and the ignorance of terrains in which electoral officials were to operate.  These failures of the past were unfortunately common in the just concluded registration exercise.  In the past, late arrival of voting materials, especially in known opposition strong areas, under supply and over supply of ballot papers in many areas, and the intimidative presence and overt action of some of the security forces were obvious.

It is a pity that the past elections in Nigeria had generated so much passion and heat that the unity of the country had been threatened and the economy weakened.  The 1979 presidential contest dragged leading contestants to the Supreme Court on the interpretation of the controversial twelve one third clause.  Subsequent elections had also reached the Supreme Court and had been resolved on substantial compliance with the Electoral Laws (first enunciated by Justice Fatai_Williams in Awolowo and Shagari case in 1979.

Generally, the ‘substantial compliance‘ clause, to me, gives room for any method to be used to win the presidential contest.  Once you win, there would be some aspect of legal coverage.

In the past elections in the country especially in 2007, the Courts of Law have proved to be the true arbiters of real winners of elections where INEC officials have done their worse.  Governors, Senators and other legislators who illegally occupied their posts have been sent packing.

The belief that it is only in the courts that the real winners of electoral contests could be decided is a great indictment on the country‘s electoral regulations which are skewed towards the maintenance of the old despicable system.  It has also put the administration of justice in danger.  Some judges who are regarded as the last hope of the oppressed are being regarded as devils by notorious riggers.

There is a need to uphold and adorn the Temple of Justice in the country during and after the April elections. We may not disappoint the friends of Nigeria – both foreign and local – if things are done in the most democratic and civilized way.  Elections need not be rigged if the motives of seeking elective posts are patriotic and selfless.  The main problem seems to be the present lucrative nature of local politics which places emphasis on sinecure posts, high salary, juicy allowances and less risk to winners.

The prevailing atmosphere encourages all means of getting elected, including killings, if necessary.
The art of getting it right this time involves the actions of political operators to recognize the danger posts and drive carefully according to the rules of the game.  A successful administration would strive for the best and offer the best solutions for current problems and the future ones.

The voters would be wise in ensuring the continuation of a forward looking regime.  However, the bane of Nigerian politics is the ‘sit tight‘ mentality of failed leaders who would want to cling to power by ‘do or die method.

The real lovers of Nigeria would love to see a change of attitude among professional politicians and their sychophantic supporters.  The new leaders would examine problems of political development, growth and economic prosperity for all.  And the people, too, should change their attitude from the crude ethnic and religious rigidity to a more liberal frame of mind that promotes unity and progress.

I believe at this moment, Nigeria needs a President who is a statesman and not a party idealist whose main assignment is to chase out ‘rascals‘ from their progressive and enlightened States. Its slogan should be Full Employment, Political stability and Economic prosperity for all.