ELECTORAL
LAW REFORM IN NIGERIA – A CRITIQUE
Introduction
Political office
holders' seldom wish to leave office, manipulating the electoral process and
subverting electoral laws. There are two options open to the Nigerian
electorates. The first is to abnegate their rights and tolerate those manipulations.
The second is to contest issues with the political leaders and insist on
political and electoral reforms that would safeguard their interests. The
electoral reforms being articulated centre on the following issues: independent
candidacy, membership of political party to contest election, restriction on
political party formation, campaign finance, the immunity and overbearing
powers of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and gender
question.
This is a critique of
the electoral reform Bill proposed by INEC to the National Assembly. I argue
that the Bill cannot usher in a democratic and participatory electoral system
in Nigeria; rather it would perpetuate old values and advantages in the
electoral process.
INEC Electoral Draft Bill
In a bid to reform the
electoral process, the electoral body, INEC proposed a bill to the National
Assembly in 1999. This draft bill is deficient in many respects, which shall be
pointed out. First the INEC bill is against the spirit of participatory
democracy.
Sections 77 and 116 of
the draft INEC Bill, as reinforced by sections 7(4), 65 (2) (b), 106 (d), 131
(c) and 177 (c) of the Constitution of Nigeria 1999, prohibits independent candidacy
in elections. For a vibrant democracy, independent candidates should be allowed.
There are also
unnecessary restrictions on the formation of political parties. Section 78 of the INEC draft Bill
provides that a political party must have branches in at least two-thirds of
the states of the federation including the federal capital territory, Abuja. This
is an unnecessary restriction as regards party formation. This provision should
be deleted.
Scrutiny of records
for the true source of finance for campaigns is important. It is not enough as
stated in Section 100 of the draft Bill that the audited account submitted to INEC
after being countersigned by the party leader be accepted. The fine of N100.00 as
limit for party donation by individuals is too little. This provision should accommodate
higher funding levels and stricter penalties laid down for defaulters for the
set limit. As the draft Bill is now, "money bags" could still
highjack the electoral process by floating the campaign finance limit with
impunity.
INEC should be open to
judicial review. Section 79 of the
draft stipulates that the decision of the commission as to which party to
register is final. This could turn INEC into an autocratic "empire".
It should be possible for an aggrieved party to question INEC's verdict and
have access to fair hearing. The electoral Bill submitted by INEC has sexist
language, which is unacceptable in a modem society. For instance, Section 114 of the draft bill providing
for the offices of Chairman and Vice Chairman is to say the least not gender -
sensitive. It would have been better if the Bill mentioned the offices of Chair
Person and Vice Chair Person.
The words,
“recognition” and “registration” are used interchangeably in the draft Bill with
regard to political parties. Section 40 talks about recognition, while Section
15 (b) is about registration. It is important to limit the power of INEC to
recognition.
INEC seems to have too
many powers. In Sections 86, 87, 88, 89, 90 etc. INEC gives itself extensive
powers:
Section 86: Every
registered political party shall give INEC at least seven days notice of any
convention, conference or meeting for the purpose of electing members of the
executive committee.
Section 87: A political
party cannot change its registered name without the approval of INEC.
Section 88: Every
political party must renew its registration on or before 31st December
following every presidential election. The fee to be paid shall be prescribed
by INEC, failure to comply leads to disqualification.
Section 89: Political
party symbols must be approved by INEC.
Section 90: For two or
more political parties to merge, strict requirements must be met for the
commission to approve it.
In the spirit of our
nascent democracy, the above sections should be deleted. On Local Government
Autonomy, the imposition in Section 122 of the draft Bill of three years'
tenure for Area Council Representatives is unacceptable. This is at variance with
the tenure for Governor and President of Nigeria, which is four years.
The INEC Bill has many
constitutional infringements. On party registration requirements, Section 78 of
the draft Bill contradicts Section 222 of the constitution. Section 222
provides the following requirements viz., party constitution, open membership,
structure, name/logo/symbols not to have ethnic connotation, Headquarters at Abuja,
names and addresses of National officers to be registered at Abuja. INEC has
added a draconian dimension to the above in Section 78 (e), (g), compelling a
political party to maintain offices in at least two thirds of the states of the
federation, including Abuja. This is unnecessary. The provisions in the
constitution should suffice.
Emerging Electoral Trends
The weakness of the
electoral law has seen the gradual perversion of the electoral process under
the present democratic dispensation in Nigeria. For example, there have been
proven cases of false documents and certificates presented by elected officials
in many of the political parties. All these people were cleared by INEC to contest
elections and many of them won. A specific case in point is that of the disgraced
former speaker of the House of Representatives, Salisu Buhari, who was indicted
for using a forged certificate to contest elections. Many other elected representatives
have been allegro to commit similar crimes ranging from forgery of certificates
to drug trafficking offences. This is a blatant violation of electoral law, for
which a competent electoral body and state security apparatus would have
detected and disqualified those involved. Better still, they ought to be
prosecuted whenever such crime is detected. However, none of these have
happened since those crimes were uncovered.
The trend in the
electoral processes currently is very disturbing especially as it relates to
preparation for the next general elections in 2003, especially the presidential
elections. Incumbent elected representatives from the local government level to
the presidency have begun to use public funds to further their campaigns for
re-election. Whereas the electoral law does not allow this. Indeed, political
campaign should not be allowed two years before the election.
Policy Concerns
1. The electoral law as it is currently does not empower the
people, but disempowered them. It has to be reformed to create access and
participatory democracy.
2. Independent candidates should be allowed.
3. The electoral law should be gender-sensitive.
4. While been given a high level of autonomy, the powers of the
electoral body should be curtailed and its actions open to judicial review.
5. Campaign laws have to be streamlined and strictly enforced.
6. The role of money in politics must be checked through the
electoral law.
Conclusion
The litmus test for
democracy in Nigeria will be the extent to which the electoral process through
the electoral law instituted, is able to engender fair, participatory, and
inclusive electoral participation by the people. If the electoral law is weak, deficient,
or poorly enforced, the electoral process will be easily subverted. There is need
therefore to reform and strengthen the electoral law beyond what is proposed by
INEC and ensure full adherence to those laws.
Follow @wingrassnews
No comments:
Post a Comment