Nigeria’s Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)
as part of its review of the 2019 General elections in the country is
reportedly working on a proposal for the alteration of the 1999 Constitution as
amended to enable it reduce the number of political parties in the country. A
total of 91 political parties participated in the 2019 general elections, the
highest number ever.
There were 71 Presidential candidates. The ballot paper was
quite long. Festus Okoye the INEC Commissioner in charge of information and
voter education says this created a “logistics nightmare,”, and “confused many
voters, particularly the less educated during the election.” INEC wants the
Constitution amended to enable it register and deregister parties that are at
best “mere platforms for political jobbers.”
Indeed, many Nigerians have expressed concern about the
length of the ballot paper used for the February 23 and March 9 general
elections in Nigeria. You necessarily had to search for the party
logos, despite the fact that the logos were arranged alphabetically. If
INEC says many voters particularly the uneducated were confused, we can only
assume that INEC as the umpire is giving this information based on the feedback
that it got. The truth of the matter is that many of the 91 political parties
were unknown. Most of them were registered at the last minute and some of them
in fact were known only by the name of the founder/chairman. The emergence of
many political parties may give the impression of a flourishing multi-party
democracy but when these political parties are no better than special purpose
vehicles or briefcase parties to promote a personality or to raise funds and
launder money, then indeed, there should be cause for concern. But where should
INEC draw the line?
This question is pertinent in the light of constitutional provisions in Chapter 4 of the 1999 Constitution which guarantee the freedoms of association, assembly, expression and belief, key issues at the heart of the political party formation process. Those who argue that the more political parties we have, the better also often rely on the Supreme Court 2002 judgement in Gani Fawehinmi vs INEC where the court held that the right of association is a fundamental human right. Chief Gani Fawehinmi whose contributions to the development of our jurisprudence through advocacy and litigation remains evergreen had gone to court to challenge the electoral commission’s refusal toregister the National Conscience Party (NCP). The Supreme Court dismissed 12 of the 13 guidelinesused by INEC for party registration as “unconstitutional.”
This question is pertinent in the light of constitutional provisions in Chapter 4 of the 1999 Constitution which guarantee the freedoms of association, assembly, expression and belief, key issues at the heart of the political party formation process. Those who argue that the more political parties we have, the better also often rely on the Supreme Court 2002 judgement in Gani Fawehinmi vs INEC where the court held that the right of association is a fundamental human right. Chief Gani Fawehinmi whose contributions to the development of our jurisprudence through advocacy and litigation remains evergreen had gone to court to challenge the electoral commission’s refusal toregister the National Conscience Party (NCP). The Supreme Court dismissed 12 of the 13 guidelinesused by INEC for party registration as “unconstitutional.”
However, a political party is a creation of law, and it must
be remarked that no right is absolute. Section 222 of the 1999 Constitution
refers. Political parties are registered based on stipulated rules
and guidelines, and where those provisions spelt out in the relevant
statutes are not met, such parties do not live up to the billing of being
regarded as political parties. This much was demonstrated in August 2011 when
the then INEC, with Professor Attahiru Jega as Chair, de-registered six
political parties for having failed to participate in the April 2011 elections.
The parties failed to field even a candidate! INEC relied on Section 78(7) of
the Electoral Act 2010. In the 2011 election, there were 63 political parties.
In 2019, the number had increased to 91!. As Nigeria prepares for the 2023
general elections, there can be no doubt that more political parties would
emerge. But is the proliferation of political parties good for our democracy?
Does INEC need to have the constitution altered to be able to
de-register political parties?
I think not. It will be recalled that in March 2019, Femi
Falana, SAN had expressed an opinion on this matter, and in a piece titled
“INEC’s power to deregister political parties.” His whole point is that the law
already grants INEC the powers to de-register political parties. He
correctly referred to the May 2017 amendment to the 1999 Constitution, to wit,
the Fourth alteration to the Constitution, Section 225 thereof,
wherein it is stated that INEC is empowered to de-register political
parties on the following grounds: “(a) a breach of any of the requirements for
registration; (b) failure to win at least 25 per cent of votes cast in: (i) one
state of the Federation in a presidential election; or (ii) one local
government of a state in a governorship election; (c) failure to win at least
(i) one ward in the chairmanship election; (ii) one seat in the national or
state House of Assembly election; or (iii) one seat in the councillorship
election.” This particular alteration having been signed into law,
albeit President Buhari assented to the fourth alterations piecemeal, (he
withheld assent on five issues), represents the true position of the
Constitution. INEC therefore needs not seek any further alterations or
amendments to the Constitution. Falana has argued, and he is right that if the
law is applied, there would be fewer than 10 political parties standing.
What remains is for INEC to apply the law. But I
must add a caveat here: the de-registration of political parties must not end
up as an act of vendetta, witch-hunt or intimidation. Any political party that
is de-registered on the basis of performance or violation of the law,
has every right to re-apply for registration and should the same political
party meet the statutory conditions, it should be registered afresh. The rules
must be upheld but at the same time, constitutional rights must be respected.
Where does that leave us? We are left with the need for INEC as the regulatory
body doing everything possible to respect the rules and thereby deepen the
electoral landscape.
Nigeria’s political party system must not be allowed to
become a scam, the political equivalent of the notorious 419. I am reliably
told that the biggest lottery in Nigeria today, is the formation of a
political party. The political parties are also fast becoming like churches.
Anybody can set up a political party, and use it to raise funds: you can sell
tickets to aspiring candidates who need a platform, you can raise funds online,
all you need to do is to print a few posters and make as much noise
as possible. You can even at the last moment, step down and declare support for
a richer party and collect a ransom! This may sound cynical but that is
precisely what I understand is going on in the real sector of Nigeria’s
political party system. It is unjustifiable and it must not be sustained. Once
upon a time in Nigeria, we had political parties that were ideas-driven. In the
First and Second Republics, political leaders tried to push ideas. Political
leaders were identified with particular visions. Today, many of our political
leaders know next to nothing about anything. The naked desperation for power is
all that we see on display. This is shameful in a country that produced Nnamdi
Azikiwe, Obafemi Awolowo, Ahmadu Bello, Ernest Ikoli, SLA Akintola, Adegoke
Adelabu, Aminu Kano, Ibrahim Waziri, Nwafor Orizu, Mbonu Ojike, Anthony
Enahoro, Kenneth Mbadiwe. Where are the visionaries of today? We are
unfortunately in the age of Godfathers. Men who fight over positions, and who
play God over the fortunes of their compatriots and our country. We are in the
season of mediocrity, incompetence, and opportunism. Professor Pat Utomi even
puts it better. He says “criminals” have taken over Nigeria.
INEC has a lot more to worry about, beyond the size of the
ballot paper and the number of registered political parties. I will return to
that shortly. In the Presidential and legislative elections conducted on April
17, 2019 in Indonesia, the ballot paper was so large, it could serve as a
wrapper. Each voter had five ballot papers! But that is because for the first
time, Indonesia conducted its Presidential and legislative elections, federal
and local, on the same day to save cost. There were 18 political parties on the
ballot, much fewer than ours, 190 million voters, and over 240, 000 candidates.
Indonesia managed to conduct an election that was considered free and fair,
with incumbent President Joko Widodo (a.ka. Jokowi) winning with over 55% of
total votes cast. I am not an admirer of President Widodo. I think he, like
Marie Le Pen (France) and Boris Johnson (UK) is too Trumpian, but the negative
influence that US President Donald Trump has exerted on the balance of
geo-politics and the character of global politics, is a subject for another
day. India also held general elections this year between April 11 to May 19. It
was an election in seven phases, 900 million voters, and 67% turn out.
Incumbent President Narendra Modi of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) recorded
what you could call a landslide victory.
The election was actually a referendum on Modi’s leadership
even if I consider his propaganda, presidential style campaign approach and his
partisanship a bit too much for India. But whereas we have seen incumbents in
many of the elections this year holding on by hook or crook to power (a notable
exception is Ukraine), I believe that there are lessons that Nigeria’s INEC can
learn from other jurisdictions about institutional capacity and processes. The
review that INEC seems to be ready to embark upon must take a holistic view of
what has happened this year in other jurisdictions. What lessons can we learn?
I add to that the fact that there are some urgent issues
arising from the 2019 general election in Nigeria that will require special
attention. Section 225 of the 1999 Constitution is effusive about the “finances
of political parties”. Section 226 insists on “annual report of finances” but
as we know, every election in Nigeria is over-monetized. Those who have the
deepest pockets buy the votes and short-change Nigerians. There were stories of
bullion vans being moved around during the 2019 general elections. INEC has
been very quiet about that. Who are the owners of the bullion vans? Who used
bullion vans to buy votes? Section 227 of the 1999 Constitution is very
eloquent about objection to the use of “physical force or coercion in promoting
any political objective or interest” Where was INEC? The 2019 general elections
in Nigeria raised many questions about security, campaign finance and the
integrity of the democratic process. It is good news, absolutely good news,
however, that INEC under Professor Yakubu Mahmoud is now showing a willingness
to listen and to make amends and respond to the urgent need to deepen Nigeria’s
electoral process.
I commend that and I note in particular, INEC’s response to
the report by the European Union Electoral Observer Mission. The EUEOM came up
with 30 recommendations. Both INEC and the Presidency have said they would pay
careful attention to the recommendations. This is a laudable departure from the
needless arrogance and contempt with which the Buhari government habitually
attends to criticisms. One more observation here: INEC says it did not use but
only experimented with an electronic server during the 2019 elections. In the
21stcentury, that sounds asinine, like 14thcentury stuff. All things being
equal, President Buhari has one more general election to conduct: the 2023
general elections. He can either turn it into a legacy event, or a source of
compounded disgrace. The choice is his to make.

0 Comments