The Edo State gubernatorial election may have been postponed, but the untoward consequence of INEC’s decision is again giving Nigerian democracy a bad name. After repeatedly restating its readiness to hold the election, INEC shifted the vote to September 28, citing security advice from the Nigeria Police and the Department of State Services (DSS), which had issued a joint statement urging INEC to reschedule the polls, ostensibly because of threats of terrorist activities during the election and over the Sallah period. But insecurity or not, the fact that INEC reversed itself twice; and the shoddy manner in which the situation was handled, not only belittled Nigerians before the international community. More importantly, it advertised to the whole world a certain Nigerian definition of democracy that diminishes the ideal and mocks the primacy of the people in the process. Coming on the heels of another electoral fiasco in Rivers, Edo raises fundamental questions of integrity and leadership by the new INEC chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu.
There was no excuse for INEC, whatsoever, to have called off the election at the eleventh hour after deploying all the requisite logistics, other than gross incompetence, partiality, corruption and mischief. First, it was an election in just one state, and one for that matter with only 1,925,105 registered voters. As such, INEC had more than adequate material, personnel and security wherewithal to do a diligent job, if it wanted. Second, the election offered another important test case for what to expect in 2019 and INEC should have seized the moment to send the right signals about its capacity to organize free, fair and credible elections. Alas, that was not to be.
The open declaration by INEC that its earlier decision to insist on the earlier scheduled September 10 date was because no official communication calling for postponement had been received from security agencies; is as suspect as the security concerns raised. What manner of security threats could prevent an election in one southern State whereas the 2015 Presidential and National Assembly elections were held in northeastern States suffocating under the Boko Haram insurgency? Predictably, the opposition PDP has described the postponement as illegal, saying: “Democracy is under a serious threat from the APC and its Gestapo security agencies…the postponement of the election by the top hierarchy of the security agencies predicated on alleged security threat was a less than ingenious attempt to buy time for the APC, which was clearly heading for a major electoral catastrophe on Saturday,” noted a statement by PDP national caretaker committee spokesman, Dayo Adeyeye.
It is a sad commentary on the character of Nigerian politicians that electoral malpractices have become a recurring decimal, which continues to bedevil the country’s democracy. However, the bigger issue is that if elections could not be conducted in a single state despite the concentration of resources, both human and financial, it portends serious implication for nation-wide electoral exercise come 2019. Ekiti governor, Ayo Fayose is already sounding the alarm, describing the postponement as the beginning of the end for democracy in Nigeria. “Obviously, this is a sign of what is to come in 2019, and Nigerians should not be amazed if in 2019, they tell us that elections cannot be conducted,” he said. Something is fundamentally wrong. Pointing accusing fingers to the politicians under the circumstances would be diversionary. The problem this time is not the Edo people who have conducted themselves peacefully despite the drums of war by the political parties. It lies squarely on the laps of INEC.
The electoral umpire’s credibility as an institution has been seemingly compromised in this exercise. If INEC had insisted on holding the election as scheduled, the onus would have been on the government to provide security to ensure a hitch-free exercise, and all speculations would have been avoided. The failure of INEC to pull through the Edo election is demoralizing; and it accentuates in no small measure, the body’s capacity to conduct future elections.
After the Anambra electoral fiasco, the expectation was that Edo will offer INEC and its new chairman, an opportunity for redemption. Unfortunately, the significance of organizing a credible election in Edo was squandered by postponing the vote over some imaginary security threats. By pandering to the dictates of security agencies, INEC missed a historic opportunity the election offered it to try to salvage its increasingly battered public image and gain some measure of public respectability. Up till now, Nigerians are yet to be convinced of the competence of the new INEC chairman, whose appointment under inauspicious circumstances raised public cynicism over his ability to rise above the culture of low expectations, after the sterling performance of Prof. Attahiru Jega in 2015.
There are other reasons for INEC to be equally worried, like most Nigerians currently are, by its actions. It is a self-indictment with negative implications for credibility and legitimacy of the electoral process and outcome. This is bad because, if eventually the elections produce a governor-elect from the ruling party, the jury is already out that the process is flawed, merely giving a seal to illegitimacy.
It is a matter for regret, indeed shame, that 17 years after the return of democracy, electoral contest in Nigeria still gives patriotic Nigerians, as well as the world, sleepless nights so much so that foreign countries, small and big, have cause to offer either advice or issue warning on good behavior to Nigerian politicians. It is an enduring tragedy that despite a period of four years within which INEC has had to prepare for this election; it is being weighed down by issues beyond logistics and ill-preparation.
With battle lines now drawn, it will be a dangerous gambit by certain quarters of the political class to either act some well-orchestrated script, or to disingenuously warehouse the electoral process for sinister purposes with the potential for sullying the outcome. If any success has been recorded in the last 17 years of Nigeria’s current democratic experience, it is that the country has, against all odds, sustained the democratic culture to continue to strengthen the pillars of participatory governance. Any act capable of reversing the progress so far made or even alter, however slightly, the journey, be it out of INEC’s incompetence or inordinate ambition of politicians, is reprehensible and unacceptable.
It is, however, pertinent to commend the Edo people for their peaceful comportment, despite the provocation by INEC. No one has done anything that would compromise the peace and stability of the state. It is, therefore, the expectation of all Nigerians that INEC would live up to its responsibility and do justice come September 28. Given the negative perception that is spreading fast about the integrity of INEC, this is yet another opportunity for the Commission to acquit itself and reassert its character as a true electoral umpire. Above all, INEC must ensure that the election on September 28, ultimately and fully reflects the genuine will and desire of the people of Edo State.
