There are still issues to be addressed, even with the new election dates, Editor, Politics/Features, EMEKA ALEX DURU, writes.
By the time the National Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Attahiru Jega, announced, on Saturday, February 7, that the general elections, earlier scheduled to commence last week, had been shifted to March 28, it was apparent that the nation had entered into a new regime of apprehension. The uncertainty, was not sudden. If anything rather, it had somehow, preceded INEC chairman’s intervention.
For example, two days before Jega’s announcement, the National Council of State (NCS), the highest advisory body in the country, had ended its meeting in Abuja, with a resolution that was interpreted along party lines and interests. While some had claimed that the council had encouraged INEC to go ahead with the polls, others had sworn that it had advised the electoral body to shift the exercise. Another interpretation of the outcome of the meeting was that INEC should consult with relevant bodies and agencies on the feasibility of holding the elections on the scheduled dates.
The confusion arising from interpretation of council of state’s meeting was further compounded by agitation from various groups on the propriety or otherwise of holding the elections. In one of the instances, 16 out of the 26 registered political parties had canvassed the shift, threatening to pull out of the poll if INEC forged ahead. The groups angling for the postponement had based their points on insecurity and shoddy distribution of Permanent Voter Cards (PVCs). There were other individuals and groups who had made case for INEC proceeding with the election, arguing that any postponement would engender distrust in the system.
Enter INEC
It was against the backdrop of these conflicting positions that Jega’s intervention became instructive. The INEC chair, in making the announcement, had argued that the shift in poll dates, was in pandering to advice by the relevant stakeholders, including political parties, security chiefs, civil society organisations and the media.
Although the commission claimed that it was ready with all election matters under its control, it expressed reservations that there were other variables not directly under its control and was therefore compelled to take the security advisory from the National Security Adviser (NSA) and the service chiefs into consideration in adjusting the timetable for the polls.
Jega said: “There are quite a number of issues in the conduct of elections, the most critical of which is security matter which is not under the control of INEC.”
In shifting the polls, he said the decision of INEC was in line with section 26(1) of the 2010 Electoral Act, as amended. The Section provides that “Where a date has been appointed for the holding of an election, and there is reason to believe that a serious breach of the peace is likely to occur if the election is proceeded with on that date or it is impossible to conduct the elections as a result of natural disasters or other emergencies, the commission may postpone the election and shall in respect of the area, or areas concerned, appoint another date for the holding of the postponed election provided that such reason for the postponement is cogent and verifiable”.
Jega, however, advised the security agencies to ensure that security situation in the North East on which the shift was predicated were quickly resolved before the new date.
Parties react
The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), however, interpreted the postponement as a deliberate measure by INEC to save itself of embarrassment.
Director General of the party’s Presidential Campaign Organisation, Ahmadu Ali, who made the remark, accused INEC of not being prepared for the election.
“INEC was grossly unprepared for the election,” he said.
He stressed that while the postponement was good for INEC, it was, however, very frustrating for the PDP as a party, which was all set for the election and hopeful of a resounding victory.
He cited the non-distribution of PVCs, lack of training of staff for the election, lack of testing of the PVC card-readers and inadequate ballot papers as signs that INEC wasn’t ready for the election.
All Progressives Congress (APC) also read meanings into the shift, alleging unseen hands of the government. Its Presidential Campaign Organisation, for instance, alleged what it called embedded vested interest and sinister motives behind the postponement of the dates of the 2015 elections and asked President Goodluck Jonathan and PDP to come clean.
Jonathan speaks
In apparent attempt to clear the air and absolve himself of any hidden agenda, Jonathan, shortly after INEC’s announcement on the shift, assured of his commitment to the sanctity of May 29, 2015 as the terminal date of his first term in office, stressing that the date will remain sacrosanct.
In a statement by his media aide, Reuben Abati, the president appealed to all stakeholders to accept the adjustment of the election dates by INEC in good faith, adding that the electoral body has a responsibility to conduct credible elections in which every Nigerian of voting age is afforded the opportunity to exercise his or her civic right without any form of hindrance.
In his words, “this is not a time to trade blames or make statements that may overheat the polity, but a time to show understanding and support the electoral commission to conduct the elections successfully.”
He did a follow-up last Wednesday, when he assured that he would inaugurate the next president even if he loses in the election, stressing that insinuations in some quarters that he would not hand over, if he is beaten, is clearly misplaced.
He recalled that if in 2011 he had gone against the norm in the continent and had pledged that if he had lost, he would go home and rest, it would not be a big deal to do so now that Nigerians had given him the opportunity to serve the country for four uninterrupted years.
“So if the elections are conducted and I lose, of course, I will inaugurate a new government. There is no way I (am justified to) say if I lose, I will not hand over,” he vowed.
Beyond the shift
In what seemed an obvious attempt at addressing the PVC controversy, INEC had extended the distribution and collection of the cards till March 8. The essence of the new arrangement, according to the commission, is to ensure that no Nigerian of voting age is disenfranchised at the polls.
Incidentally, even as the commission labours to remedy the already messy situation, Nigerians are not amused at the turn of events. On occasions in the past when the body had embarked on PVC distribution in various states of the federation, the exercise had been characterised by incidences of irregularity and shoddiness.
The exercise, which ordinarily involved voters cross-checking their names in the displayed voters’ register and collecting PVCs in exchange for the old ones, had turned out frustrating, given the apparent lapses in the arrangement.
In Lagos, for instance, when the exercise fell below expectation, residents took to the streets to protest, storming the office of INEC.
In some instances, the electorate who went to designated polling units to claim their PVCs had series of problems to contend with, ranging from inadequate attestation forms, swearing of affidavit in court, absence of PVC even when the voter’s name and picture appeared in the INEC voter register among other concerns.
Also, some electorate have also not considered collection of their PVCs as a civic responsibility. Thus, even as INEC has extended the time for the collection exercise, there is no certainty that the expected result would be attained. By the end of last week, for example, records indicated that some Nigerians were yet to get their PVCs.
Latching onto this, Ali accused Jega of bias over the distribution exercise.
The former PDP national chairman, who wondered why Borno State, which was under siege, registered more PVC collection than Lagos State, insinuated that the commission might have allowed its distribution of the PVCs to be tampered with.
According to him, “from all indications, INEC is not fully prepared for the elections. There are issues with PVCs. Almost 30 million people are yet to get their PVCs, despite that the date of distribution was extended. Will it be possible to have a credible election when millions of Nigerians are disenfranchised because of lack of PVCs?
“There are also reports that the PVC readers are not fully distributed and tested. How can INEC handle cases of faulty card-readers? Do they have Plan B in situations where voters are lined up and the card-readers refuse to work? Ballot boxes are also reportedly inadequate, while training of staff for the elections had not been completed.”
He suggested that anyone with temporary voters card (TVC), should be allowed to use them. “Those who voted in 2011 and have the old voter cards should be allowed to use them, because what INEC is introducing is a new system that Nigerians are yet to grapple with.”
Chief Press Secretary to the INEC Chairman, Kayode Idowu, however, maintains that there is no consideration for TVCs for the elections.
Confronting Boko Haram challenge
But a senior lecturer in the Department of History and International Relations, Lagos State University (LASU), who asked not to be mentioned, told TheNiche that the PVC issue does not constitute a threat to the election as the security challenge posed by Boko Haram insurgency.
According to him, there is no strict constitutional requirement that a certain number of people must be registered before election would take place, but that the threat of disenfranchising or actual disenfranchisement of a certain section of the country may pose a challenge to the credibility of the election.
“What is more important is ensuring that the situation in the North East is brought under control. The fuss about the PVC is not really the issue. In the first place, collection or possession of PVC is no guarantee that the voter would be disposed or available to vote. That cannot be cited as reason for nullity of the election; after all I am not aware of any section of the constitution that stipulates that we shall have any particular number of potential voters for an election to take place. My concern is really with the disturbing situation in the North East. I have the fear that unless the crisis in the region is effectively tackled, it may work against the conduct of the election. This is an issue that we cannot afford to gloss over,” he said.
Insecurity, occasioned by the Boko Haram challenge in some parts of the North has been of immense concern to Nigerians. The terrorist group, which has increased its offensive on the country since the inauguration of the Jonathan administration, has put the country in bad light among local Nigerians and international observers.
What particularly exposed the audacity of the sect to the international community was the Monday, April 14 abduction of about 276 students of Government Secondary School, Chibok, Borno State, by its suspected members.
The sect is yet to relent on its murderous campaign. In what perhaps seemed a new dimension to their atrocious acts, the insurgents have moved from guerrilla attacks to brazen annexation of towns and communities in Borno, Yobe and Adamawa states. It is the consideration of such audacious engagements by the sect that the LASU lecturer considers as posing more threats to the election.
The president has, however, assured that a joint multi-national force, including the Nigerian military, was equal to the danger posed by the insurgents, adding that the Nigerian Army had taken delivery of new military hardware that would help it in its crusade against them. Many saw the assurance as window of hope in conducting the election.
Managing the foot soldiers
Aside the PVC controversy and North East security challenge, analysts also identify the combative dispositions of supporters of PDP presidential candidate, Jonathan, and his APC counterpart, Muhammadu Buhari, of constituting threats to the elections. Reports had at a time quoted ex-militants and activists from Niger Delta of threatening to go to war if the president is not returned for second term. They had argued that given that the zone produces the oil wealth upon which Nigeria’s economy is anchored, denying the president who hails from the area a second term would be seen as an affront and an indication that indigenes of the zone are being treated as second-class citizens.
Regardless, Jonathan has indicated that everything would be done to ensure that nobody goes to war.
“We will make sure that we do things in a way that nobody goes to war. We have a country and we must protect the country. Without the country, I cannot be president,” he remarked.
His supporters also have not embarked on any action.
Same, however, may not be said of supporters of Buhari, who have, on occasions, pelted the president’s convoy with stones and sachet water. One of PDP campaigns in Gombe, for instance, recorded explosions that the president’s convoy escaped by the whiskers.
Director, Gender Care Initiative, a Lagos-based Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO), Dr. Ijeoma Ezeocha, described these acts of violence as the real dangers facing the elections in particular and the nation’s democracy in general.
She said: “These are the real dangers facing the nation. If people are intimidated, molested and prevented from exercising their rights in whatever form, the nation’s democracy would be compromised. This, we must guard against,” she said.