In defense of INEC
ACHO ORABUCHI
Dallas, Texas
Thursday, May 3, 2007
"... Laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind... As that becomes more enlightened, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times."
–Thomas Jefferson
"There's no perfect electoral system. And there's no neutral electoral system."
–Charles Costello, director of the Democracy program at the Carter Center.
For laws and institutional changes to achieve their purpose, no matter how lofty they are, there must be fertile and receptive minds yearning to absorb the changes. The fertile minds must free themselves from the old behavior and attitude that are not in consonance with the desired changes. Consequently, the old behavior, if allowed to manifest its dimensions, would definitely hamstring the seeming desired changes aimed at transforming the system.
While Prof. Maurice Iwu-led
INEC has been working hard to transform the electoral system, our morose and
entrenched culture of corruption that has permeated our political being, would
spurn such changes in whiff of desperation. The behavior and attitude of
individual political parties and candidates who believe that they must win in
every election or position drive the incendiary actions that foment violence,
thug-like behavior, and fake ballots. The INEC did not produce this perdition.
In an environment where some political parties and candidates push their agenda through violence, thug-like behavior, and fake ballots—the variables the electoral body could not control—apathy and cynicism would prevail. It’s a baleful phenomenon and INEC becomes an easier target on which to heap the blame. Elections are won and lost; politicians should look forward to the next one. But Nigeria’s politicians are not equipped to sustain constructive opposition. As a result, they tend to falter when they electoral losses.
In any case, for one to fully grasp and appreciate the amount effort and genuine changes INEC has instituted for free, fair, and violence-free elections, one has to step outside the modus operandi of Nigerian politics. In other countries, people go into politics to serve the people and probably start making money when they leave office. They create personal wealth based on experience and contacts they gained while in government. In Nigeria, however, people venture into politics or public service primarily to amass wealth. Nigeria has to change this phenomenon in order for the benefits of institutional changes to be fully realized.
Well, while there has been veiled support and criticism of INEC for its performance on April polls, some independent groups have commended the electoral body for a successful performance. The gubernatorial and state assembly elections on Saturday, April 14, 2007 have been relatively successful. So also are the elections of the president and members of National Assembly on April 21, 2007.
On April 17, 2007, PUNCH reported that the New Education Watch Foundation, an international observer group from the United Kingdom endorsed governorship and House of Assembly elections in Bayelsa State. Also TIDE reported the same day that Gov Chimaroke Nnamani, Enugu State Governor, characterized the elections as successful as he commended INEC for successfully conducting the elections.
A day earlier, THISDAY and Guardian respectively reported that the Commonwealth observer group commended INEC for conducting fair and free elections. The group adjudged the April 14 polls as successful. There are many other groups from both the opposition and supporters of INEC that strongly characterized all the April polls as successful and commended the INEC for a marvelous job.
In assessing the performance of INEC, Deacon Ralph Egbu, Secretary to Abia State government (SSG), aptly described what may be obtainable in other parts of the country when he stated in a published interview in April 22nd issue of Vanguard Newspapers, “I don’t want to pretend that I know what happened in other states. In Abia State, I want to express great appreciation to INEC for its commendable efforts. Before now, I was one of those Nigerians who had doubts that INEC could rise to the occasion to give us a free and fair election. We defected from PDP to PPA and the belief PDP had was that they control the police and INEC and that their winning was a foregone conclusion. But when on that day I went to cast my vote as early as 9.00am, they were already at my polling booth. I presented myself and I saw my name and picture and, on the ballot paper, I saw the name of my candidate and his picture, I just said these people are wonderful.”
There are still strong criticisms of INEC, especially after the presidential poll, from various quarters. Weighing the totality of the activities of INEC and considering the impediments beyond its control, one would fairly conclude that the electoral body performed its job successfully. The conclusion does not foreclose the existence of anomalies in the entire exercise; instead of being fixated with variances, we need to celebrate the strengths of the commission while constructively addressing its weaknesses. INEC does not claim to be a utopian system.
While unscrupulous politicians have knack for carping of their electoral losses, individuals whose interest is to advance democracy, focus on correcting the glitches. There is no perfect system. As a result, there must be a procedure in place to correct the anomalies inherent in our electoral system. With continuous democratic elections, Nigeria’s electoral process would inevitably experience continuous progress. It is therefore our collective onus to work diligently to ensure continuous democratization of every facet of our system.