I start with the statement that changed the trajectory of the 2019 elections.
“Following a careful review of the implementation of its logistics and operational plan and the determination to conduct free, fair and credible elections, the commission came to the conclusion that proceeding with the elections as scheduled is no longer feasible”. With those words, Mahmood Yakubu, the embattled chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) tried to convince a skeptical nation not only that he means well, but also that he can be trusted to deliver a free, fair and credible elections.
With those words also, Nigerians realised nothing has really changed, because by that singular action, it means that Nigeria’s elections have been postponed three consecutive times. In 2011, the elections were postponed after voting had started. In 2015, the elections, scheduled to hold on the 14th of February, was shifted by six weeks after the military compelled the agency to postpone the elections on the basis that it could not guarantee the peace of the elections.
As in 2015, the stakes are very high this time. As in 2015, this election is poised to be a close run between the incumbent, this time President Muhammadu Buhari and the People’s Democratic Presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar. As expected, the two parties have criticised the action taken by INEC. For obvious political reasons, especially unlike in 2015 where the government of the day was transparent about influencing the postponement, this government wants to be seen as non-interfering in the activities of the commission. In the context, the condemnation from the ruling party has been very harsh, and sometimes border on comedy, especially that from the party’s spokesman Festus Keyamo.
But like everything in Nigeria, we continue to bring this on ourselves. Many have argued in the past and I will like to reiterate here that there is nothing independent about INEC. The “independent” in the name is faux pas. An agency cannot be independent if the President appoints the head. The INEC head and its commissioners are all appointees of the President. So, whether true or not, the perception is that the INEC chairman seeks to protect the interest of the person that appointed him. The same applies to the commissioners.
Since Yakubu, a brilliant and impeccable academic, was appointed in 2015, he has presided over inconclusive elections, the shameful double registration of the governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, and the ramshackle elections of Osun and Ekiti states. Whereas there may be no any wrong doing by the INEC chairman in any of these situations, it is also on record that all the situations favoured the President and the ruling All Progressive Congress (APC). So, to be truly independent and save the country all the speculations and perceptions of bias, it has become wise that the President should be stripped of the power to appoint the head of INEC.
The law is one of those poor and weak legacies of military rule. A president should not appoint someone that will organise, prepare, and determine the trajectory of elections in which he will be a participant and a player. The same INEC submits its budget and audit of its finances to the President, through the ministry of finance. There can be no independence without independent financing.
For the avoidance of doubt, Nigeria’s democracy, despite its many challenges, is maturing. In the report on the 1999 elections submitted by the Carter Centre and the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, both in the US, concluded, “the process fell short of its democratic objectives. Electoral irregularities, including fraud and vote rigging, that our observers and others in the field witnessed are cause for serious concern. Especially disconcerting were the inflated voter returns and altered results in many States”. While no one will suggest that things are now perfect, INEC, over the years, has improved on voters registration, provided permanent voters card, and the public is now aware, not only of the numbers of voters, but where those voters are. And in 2015, we recorded an important milestone when we had peaceful transition of power to the opposition.
As I conclude, I will lean also on the summary of the same report when it argued “an election is not by itself sufficient to institutionalise democracy”. The President knows this. What is important therefore is for us to continue to build systems that endure irrespective of who becomes President. Over INEC, and other national institutions, our successive Presidents see themselves as infallible and consider themselves as those with the best and greatest interest of Nigeria. It is not the case. It is best for today and the future that the President is stripped of all these overbearing powers because the President is also a “participant”.
I thank you.
Ogho Okiti
