All modern
democratic nations in the world have evolved a system by which their citizens
participate in the process of electing their leaders.
Perhaps, nothing is
more important in a democratic system than its electoral process. It allows the
citizens to both interact and participate in the political process.
This post examines
the history of elections in Nigeria, from the colonial era to date. It also
examines the current challenges facing the country in the task of conducting
free, fair, transparent, credible elections.
Major Pre-requisites of an Electoral System
The electoral system
is a process or the machinery through which citizens in any given democratic
state elect their representative in competitive elections that are held at
periodic intervals.
While the casting of
vote is the highest point of an electoral process, other activities include the
division of a country into electoral units known as constituencies, the
existence of political parties, registration and periodic revision of the list
of registered voters, or revalidation of voters register, the nomination of candidates
for the election, political neutrality on the part of the electoral commission,
opportunities for parties and candidates to campaign; equal access to
government media; an avenue for legal redress for the defeated and power of
recall, if the electorates are dissatisfied with the performance of their
representatives before the expiration of his tenure.
Colonial Period
The electoral system
was first introduced in Nigeria in 1923, with the provision under the Clifford
constitution for the election of three unofficial members from Lagos and
Calabar into the Legislative Council with a minimum income requirement of 50 pounds
per annum.
The introduction of
the elective principle brought about unprecedented political awakenings, and
the emergence of political parties, notably the Nigerian National Democratic
Party(NNDP), led by Herbert Macaulay in Lagos, and Calabar National League, in
the South Eastern Calabar Municipality (Okoye, 1964).
The first sign of
electoral bickering in Nigerian politics occurred in 1941 over the nomination
of a candidate that was to represent Lagos municipality in the legislative council
between Samuel Akinsanya, an Ijebu Yoruba, and Ernest Ikoli, an Ijaw.
The controversy
subsequently assumed ethnic colouration and eventually led to the split of the
Lagos Youth Movement.
Under the 1946
Richard’s constitution, no extension of the elective principle to other parts
of the country was allowed, other than the reduction of income requirements to
50 pounds per annum.
With the creation of
regional assemblies in the North, East and West, however, a system of Electoral
College was introduced to elect indirectly members into regional legislative
assemblies.
Since the hallmark
of the colonial administration was”, the elective principle was grudgingly
conceded by the colonial powers, while franchise requirements differed from one
region to another, in the line with the British policy of ‘Divide and Rule’.
For example, universal adult suffrage was introduced in the eastern region in
1954, but in the north, adult male suffrage was allowed for both the regional,
and the 1959 federal elections.
First Republic
The first republic
was ushered in with a federal government and three regional governments formed
based on elections held under the colonial period. At the 1959 Constitutional
Conference Nigerian political leaders resolved that post-independent Nigeria’s
Federal House of Representative would be composed of 312 members, elected from
a single-member constituency, of approximately 100,000 people per constituency.
The ratio of
regional representatives clearly shows the lopsided nature, and far-reaching
and decisive electoral implications of the constituency delimitation exercise,
which clearly favored the old northern region.
Out of the 312
seats, the north was allocated 167 seats, Western 57, Mid-Western 14, Eastern
70, and the federal territory of Lagos, 4 seats.
With the clear
majority of the seats allocated to the North, and considering the regional
character of the major political parties.
Northern People’s
Congress (NPC), National Convention of Nigeria and Cameroon (later National Convention
of Nigerian Citizens) (NCNC) and Action Group (AG), it was obvious that the
North would always have the majority of votes in any election.
In the 1959
election, for instance, the NPC won 77% of the seats in the North; the NCNC/Northern
Element Progressive Union (NEPU) won 79% in the East, While the A.G won 53
percent of the seats in the West.
An analysis of the
1959 federal elections shows that 16 out of an aggregate total of 321
successful candidates were independent, or members of minority parties. Their
total electoral poll was a marginal 578, 893 votes or 8.1 percent of an aggregate
total of 7,185,555 votes (Awolowo, 1966:88).
In the end, in order
to become relevant, most successful independent candidates crossed carpets to
the major parties, and this largely account for why the provision for
independent candidate was expunged from the electoral laws of the subsequent republics
in Nigeria.
The victory by the
northern region-based NPC was repeated in 1964 when the Nigerian National
Alliance (NNA) alliance, with NPC as the senior partner, won 198 seats in the
federal elections, the bulk of the votes coming from the North.
The defeat of the
All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA) an alliance of the major political
parties in the south created a feeling of hopelessness among Yoruba and Igbo
that the majority lead of the Hausa-Fulani led NPC may be perpetual, and would
never be changed through a parliamentary electoral process.
Indeed, the failure
of party politics in the First Republic can be remotely traced to the
controversial 1964 Federal Elections.
Perhaps the most
contentious issue in the 1964 elections and the controversial October 1965
regional election in the West was the alleged partisan disposition of the
Electoral Commission of Nigeria (ECN). The commission was reported to have
returned candidates of the favored party (notably NPC and NNDP) unopposed, even
where others parties (notably AG and NCNC) fielded candidates for the election.
Curiously, the
commission did neither recognized the partial boycott in the West, or total
boycott in the East of the 1964 elections, nor acknowledged or reflected this
in its returns of the elections.
In spite of the
desperate action to form a broad-based national government after the disputed
1964 elections, the chain of crises which the two elections generated remained
unresolved and generated into in civil disorder in the West, and the subsequent
coup d’état of 15th Jan.1966.
Second Republic
In devising the
electoral system for the Second Republic, the military, which organized the
first transition to civil rule programme in Nigeria between 1975 and 1979,
learnt from the experience of the failure of the First Republic.
First, the electoral
laws required political associations, to reflect the federal character in
membership, executive and territorial spread before they could be qualified for
registration.
Only five political association scaled these hurdles and were registered as Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN), National Party of Nigeria (NPN), People’s Redemption Party (PRP) and Great Nigeria’s People’s Party (GNPP) to contest the 1979 General Elections, with the sixth-Nigeria Advance Party (NAP) joining others to contest the 1983 general elections.
The 1979 elections were however marred by constitutional
controversies over the legal propriety of declaring Alhaji Shehu Shagari,
winner of the presidential election, without a second ballot in an electoral
college.
The legal dispute on
the constitutional interpretation of 2/3 of 19 states in the federation was
finally resolved at the Supreme Court in favour of the NPN’S flag bearer,
Alhaji Shehu Shagari, who though, scored the highest number of votes, but
according to the petitioner, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, of the U.P.N. failed to
meet the second element of the mandatory constitutional requirement, of
geographical spread.
Commenting on this
legal controversy in his memoirs, Justice Kayoed Eso, who delivered the minority
judgment in the landmark case averred, “the electoral decrees used both the
words” ‘votes’ and ‘states’ in a manner that they would not be synonymous but
contra-distinctive’’(Eso 2000:296).
In other words, the
requirement of 2/3 of the states in the federation was cumulative to that of a
simple majority. The intention was to ensure that an elected president does not
merely enjoy a narrow support base, but a countrywide electoral appeal.
This, no doubt, was
a significant electoral innovation in a plural society like
Nigeria. The fact
that the 1979 presidential Election result had to be resolved in a court of law
impose a legitimacy crisis on Shagari’s government, from its inception and this
crisis of governance dogged his administration until the 1983 General election,
which was also alleged to have been brazenly rigged.
One of the
presidential election contestants Tunji Braithwaite of NAP described the 1983
elections as an ‘electoral coup’.
Aborted Third
Republic
The main plank of
the electoral system, which ushered in the Third Republic in Nigeria, was
predicated on a gradual process, re-orientation of political culture, and
institutional adjustment which characterized the Babangida transition
programme.
In line with the
recommendations of the Political Bureau, two political parties-Social
Democratic Party (SDP) and National Republican Convention (NRC) were registered
by the National Electoral Commission, (NEC), initially headed by Professor Eme
Awa, before he was replaced by Professor Humphrey Nwosu.
Apart from promoting
the concept of ‘new breed politics for the first time in Nigerian electoral
history, grassroots-oriented politics was also encouraged by Professor Nwosu
INEC because it gave prime recognition to the ward, as the primary, but the
most significant unit or level of representation.
Indeed, the novel
idea of option ‘A4’ method of election was the most politically decisive stage
for the nomination of candidates for elections, rather than the state or
national convention of a party.
In spite of the
introduction of this apparently new electoral arrangement such as staggered
elections; government’s involvement in the registration of political parties,
along not so clear ideological poles and the open ballot system, which denied
voters’ confidently in the polls, the transition programme, eventually collapsed
due to manifest, but often denied, insincerity and inconsistency on the part of
the government.
It is worthy of note
that the electoral arrangement under Babangida, in addition to its prolonged duration
is, arguably, the most convulsive and chaotic in Nigerian electoral history.
Under Babangida, and
in the name of political re-engineering Nigeria was converted into a laboratory
for experimentation. Two governments sponsored political parties were established
by fiat (SDP and NRC); the government wrote their manifestoes and constitution;
a novel open or modified open ballot system was introduced; nomination of
party’s candidates was done through option A4, while the whole electoral process
was completely monetized.
However, because
Nigerians were no longer willing to tolerate a military dictatorship the June
12, 1993, presidential election, which was the climax of the staggered
elections turned out to be free and fair.
To the astonishment
of everyone, General Babangida annulled the election on 23 June 1993 for
reasons, which up till today, remain unconvincing. The annulment of the 1993 presidential
election and its aftermath forced Babangida to step aside.
But in order not to
allow a power vacuum a contraption unknown to Nigerian law, christened the
Interim National Government (ING) was contrived by Babangida until November 17,
1993, when Abacha forcefully set aside the Chief Earnest Shonekan led ING and
dismantled all democratic structures that were already put in place.
Under Abacha’s
transition programme only political associations promoted by military protégés
were registered; a candidate already on a party’s ticket could be disqualified
on security grounds even on the eve, or Election Day.
The climax was reached
when the five registered political parties viz UNCP, NCPN, CNC, DPN, and GDM
adopted Gen Abacha, then a serving military head of state, as their consensus candidate.
Fourth Republic
The transition
programme for the Fourth Republic commenced following the death of Gen Abacha.
Several political associations were allowed to contest the 1999 General Elections
with the proviso that only those associations who were able to satisfy
electoral requirements of geographical spread, would be qualified for
registration by the
Independent National
Electoral Commission (INEC).
Eventually, three political
parties: People Democratic Party (PDP), APP (later renamed
ANPP) and Alliance
for Democracy (AD) were registered, with the latter allowed due to a concession
given by INEC. President Olusegun Obasanjo of the P.D.P. won the presidential
election and assumed office on 29th May 1999 with a lot of goodwill, given his
background as a former military ruler who voluntarily handed over power to a democratic
government in 1979.
However, after some
years in office, particularly during his second term, the former military ruler
lost this goodwill including international acclaim when he dissipated his energy
to promoting undemocratic policies.
The first major electoral debacle of his administration was when he covertly inserted some provisions into the Electoral Act without the approval of the National Assembly.
Added to
this was the legislative indiscretion by members of the National Assembly who acted
under President Obasanjo’s surreptitious prompting to extend the tenure of
elected local government councils, by one year, with retroactive effect.
But the Supreme Court
later annulled the Electoral Act, with the effect that local councils were
dissolved after the expiration of their statutory three-year tenure, as
contained in the electoral Decree promulgated by the military, under which
councils elections were conducted in 1999.
Another major political development, which largely influenced the electoral process, was the expansion of the political space after a Supreme Court judgment, which liberalized the process of party registration and led to the participation of thirty political parties in the 2003 General elections. But due to several factors, only one of the then newly registered parties, the All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA) could make some marginal impacts during the elections. Others, like the National Democratic Party (NDP) and United Nigeria Democratic
Party (UNDP) that
showed some promise, given the political antecedents of some their leaders and
candidates, could not rise to the occasion.
The General
Elections in 2007 also brought in new parties like the Labour Party and the All
Progressive People’s Alliance (APPA) into offices in Ondo and Anambra states,
respectively.
In spite of this,
the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) retained its dominance of the country’s
electoral space both at the centre and at the state levels.
Indeed, the
governors elected on the tickets of the Progressive Peoples Parties (PPA), in Abia
and Imo States including that of Ekiti state were former members of the PDP,
who only defected from the party on the ground that the party lacked internal
democracy in the manner it conducted its gubernatorial primary elections.
The infamous third
term agenda of former President Olusegun Obasanjo not only divided the ruling
party, but also the presidency during which the president and his vice, Atiku
Abubakar took opposing positions.
Most of the woes and
crises that bedeviled the country’s electoral system during the 2007 general
elections- manipulated party primaries, cross carpeting among party members,
endless litigations and judicial reversal of results- were all linked, one way
or the other, to the distrust and acrimony generated among politicians when the
third term bid was finally defeated.
Not surprisingly,
the dismal electoral performance of the newly registered political parties in
2003 and 2007 led to the clamor by many for the reduction in the number of
political parties in the country.
The proponents of
this view argue that these parties lack physical electoral presence in the
country and that they merely exist to collect subventions from the electoral
commission. Their continued existence, it
is argued, will also contribute to the continued dominance of the PDP and the
potential danger of turning Nigeria into a one-party state.
Presently, there are
62 political parties in the country, with only a few of them electorally potent
or relevant, and others barely visible on the pages of newspapers.
However, the other
side of the coin however is that, in spite of the foregoing argument; a
multi-party system seems to be the most compatible with Nigeria’s ethnic and
linguistic mix.
The appointment of
Professor Attahiru Jega in 2010 as the new Chairman of INEC seems to have signaled
a wave of optimism in the country. This is largely due to the widely acclaimed
radical antecedents and personal integrity of the political science scholar and
the fact that he was a member of retired Justice Uwais led Electoral Reforms
Panel.
INEC under Attahiru
Jega recognised the huge expectations of Nigerians from him to deliver credible
elections in 2011.
To realise this and
work around the limited timelines, INEC in late September 2010 finally admitted
that time constraints would make it impossible for it to deliver credible
elections, and it, therefore, suggested a postponement of the elections it had
already slated for January, to April 2011.
This new position of
INEC seems to be popular with most political parties and some of their leaders
who previously had been warning INEC against shoddy preparation for the crucial
2011 polls. Nonetheless, INEC under the chairmanship of Professor Attahiru Jega
witnessed significant improvement in the conduct of elections in Nigeria, in
terms of fairness, credibility and acceptance, especially with the introduction
and use of biometrics in the accreditation of voters during the 2011 and 2015
general elections. However, although the conduct of the 2015 general elections,
witnessed the defeat of an incumbent, Goodluck Jonathan of the People’s
Democratic Party (PDP) by an opposition, Muhammadu Buhari of the All Progressives
Congress (APC) and consequent alternation of political powers, (the first in
the annals of elections in Nigeria) it is not yet Uhuru in the conduct
of free, fair and credible elections in Nigeria.
More worrisome in
recent times are the frequency of ‘inconclusive elections’ and the ignoble
roles of security agencies in the conduct of elections in Nigeria by INEC under
the chairmanship of Professor Mahmood Yakubu.
All these appear to
have cast a long shadow of doubts on the ability of INEC, as an unbiased umpire,
to conduct, free, fair and credible elections in Nigeria.
Conclusion on Elections and Electoral Process in Nigeria
The problems
confronting the administration of elections in Nigeria include lack of capacity
and shoddy preparation by the electoral commission, inadequate logistics,
government’s interference in the electoral process and the monetization of the
political space.
The way out of
Nigeria’s electoral debacle, therefore, is for the government and other
relevant stakeholders to partner to proffer appropriate remedies that can help
to address these obstacles. This is the
only recipe to free and fair elections and enduring political stability in the
country.
In this article, we
have looked into the history of elections and electoral process in Nigeria
dating from the colonial era. We observed that the colonial period was a form
of tutelage that was meant to prepare Nigerians for a representative democracy
under a parliamentary system of government.
We also noted that
after the failure of the First Republic the military organized its first transition
programme with the hope that the loopholes of the past would have been plugged.
Though, we observed
that the return of the military into politics in 1983 after a short period of
civilian rule shows that politicians in the country have learned no lesson.
The current attempts
at electoral democracy and the uncertainties surrounding the conduct of
credible elections since 1999 underscored the fact many problems and challenges
still
0 Comments