When on Thursday last week, stakeholders in Nigeria’s electoral system gathered in Abuja for a one-day Policy Dialogue organized by the National Institute for Legislative and Democratic Studies (NILDS) in collaboration with West Minister Foundation for Democracy, anxiety was written on the faces of many as they took turns to lament the continued delay in signing the Electoral Act Amendment Bill into law....CONTINUE READING THE FULL ARTICLE>>>
The soothing words of Senior Special Adviser to President Muhammadu Buhari on National Assembly Matters (Senate), Senator Babajide Omoworare, who tried to give assurances that the president would append his signature to the bill failed to elicit positive reactions for obvious reasons. It’s a road that has been travelled since early 2018, and the outcome has remained the same.
Omoworare, who was apparently relying second hand information, had noted that he had it on good authority that Buhari was meeting with the Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, SAN, and other key stakeholders on the Electoral bill, and that he was inclined to signing the reworked document this time.
But it’s been two weeks and there is not yet a whimper from the president, a seeming return to an already established pattern of delaying decision on the bill before eventually vetoing same at the last minute.
With this in mind, discussants at the policy dialogue, among whom were the former Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Attahiru Jega; current INEC boss, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu; Country Representative of Westminster Foundation for Democracy, Adebowale Olorunmola; Chairman, House of Representatives Committee on Media, Mr. Benjamin Kalu, among others, while expressing their reservations with the continued delay, appealed to Buhari to assent the bill, as according to them, time was running out.
Jega in particular, decried what he described as growing lack of sense of urgency by both the executive and the legislature to complete work on the Electoral Bill, noting that Nigeria cannot continue to dilly-dally much further on the bill and go into fresh elections in 2023 with the same old laws.
On his part, the INEC Chairman, Prof. Yakubu Mahmood who was represented by his Chief Technical Adviser, Prof., Bolade Eyinla, lamented that the snail pace of work on the Electoral bill was beginning to take a toll on INEC’s preparation for the general elections next February.
He noted that with the new Electoral law still being awaited; the commission has not been able to come up with clear-cut guidelines for the conduct of the elections, even as he pointed out that the commission, and not the Executive or the National Assembly should initiate proposed amendments to the Electoral laws as being practiced in neighbouring Ghana.
The concerns and the sense of desperation in the tone of the stakeholders are not misplaced, and if information available to our correspondents is anything to go by, Nigerians hopeful of a new electoral act, as necessary condition to ensure credible polls in 2023, may be hoping in vain, as the bill transmitted to the president fortnight ago by the National Assembly will almost certainly be rejected by the him, even as feelers suggest that it’s a ‘conspiracy’ between the legislature and the executive that will continue until 2023.
Regarding specifically, the version of the bill transmitted to the president, a reliable Aso Rock source has confirmed to our correspondent that the president has little interest in appending his signature on account of the new insertions the lawmakers made, particularly as it concerns the denial of political appointees of the right to contest in primary elections of political parties.
Recall that among other alterations made on the bill, which was initially vetoed by Buhari in December 2021 over provision for only direct primaries, the lawmakers decided that all political appointees would no longer be eligible, either as voting delegates or aspirants during the conventions or congresses of political parties, a move obviously aimed at whittling down the influence of the president and governors in deciding who gets what during party primaries.
According to Clause 84 of the recommitted bill, “No political appointee at any level shall be a voting delegate or be voted for at the convention or congress of any political party for the purpose of the nomination of candidates for any election. Where a political party fails to comply with the provisions of this Act in the conduct of its primaries, its candidate for election shall not be included in the election for the particular position in issue.”
The bill also advises aggrieved aspirants to seek redress at the Federal High Court if they suspect the political parties did not comply with the relevant provisions in the selection of candidates, even as it forecloses further registration of political parties ahead of next year’s polls.
“Notwithstanding the provisions of this Act or rules of a political party, an aspirant, who complains that any of the provisions of this Act and guidelines of a political party have not been complied with in the selection or nomination of a candidate of a political party for election, may apply to the Federal High Court for redress.
“Nothing in this section shall empower the courts to stop the holding of primaries or general election under this Act, pending the determination of a suit.”
The implication of this is that ministers, commissioners, including members of Buhari’s cabinet, would be barred from seeking the nominations of their parties, or will have to resign their appointments outright to be able to contest in primary elections.
This is contrary to what is presently the case, where ministers and commissioners take leave of absence to contest their party’s primaries and later return to their jobs, even as governors can no longer use members of their cabinet as delegates during primaries, and given the implication of this both for the president and the governors, many observers agree that it’s unlikely that the president would append his signature to the bill.
“The hush-hush approach to the amendment of such a critical law, even on the eve of an election appear suspicious, said Okey Okoroji, Lagos based constitutional lawyer. “My impression is that they don’t want that bill to become law.
“I mean, these people have been in government for more than six years, in fact, it’s their 7th year now. But they have been foot-dragging on the issue as important as improving the electoral system in order that it becomes more democratic, fair and more equitable. I don’t think the president should continue to delay signing of this act. The continued delay is suspicious.”
Business Hallmark has it on good authority that a number of state governors, particularly those of the ruling APC are presently lobbying the president to veto the bill, even as its understood that the Attorney General, Malami is unlikely to to advice his principal to append his signature.
Indeed, speaking on Politics Today, a current affairs programme on Channels TV on Monday, Malami who is known to wield enormous influence on the president, and who had advised him to withhold his assent to the first version of the bill in December, hinted that he will still advise the president not to sign the re-transmitted bill if it is against dictates of democracy, which perhaps the decision to stop political appointees seemingly does as it, at first glance, infringes on the inalienable rights of citizens to vie for elective offices.
According to the minister, the bill, which the National Assembly transmitted to the Presidency the second time on Monday fortnight ago, got to him on Monday last week for legal advice.
Malami who said he had not studied the bill, noted that, “Certainly, if I am not satisfied and if I am of the opinion that it is against the public interest, the national interest; and then against the dictates of democratic process, I would advise accordingly.”
He added, however: “But then, one thing I can tell you is that we are all interested in leaving behind a legacy of a lasting democracy; a democracy that indeed accommodates the collective interest of the Nigerian state, and eventually advances the national interest, national development and deepens the democratic process.”
Many observers opine that the move by the lawmakers could be aimed at giving the president yet another reason to withhold his accent, given their known discomfort with electronic transmission of results which happens to be the key objective of the amendment.
“The administration is deceitful with the issue of amending the electoral act. It is quite unfortunate that despite the fact that a lot of resources have been committed to this issue of amending the act, nothing has come out of it, and in my opinion it is very deliberate,” said Bar Oladotun Hassan, lawyer and president of Yoruba Council of Youths.
“Remember we have had this issue from the last senate. The attempt to amend this act to accommodate electronic voting has been on since the 8th senate, but they have always found a way to make sure that he does not work. They are trying to protect their interest, because you know that what happens in elections is actually imposition. They impose themselves on Nigerians, taking advantage of loopholes in the electoral system. They don’t want such provisions that would make it impossible for them to impose themselves on Nigerians. That is why they are still delaying the amended act.”
Indeed the latest attempt by the 9th senate to amend the electoral act 2010, to accommodate the important aspect of electronic transmission of votes from polling units, have followed a predictable pattern, what many say is an indication that it will end up as it did in 2018, when a similar attempt by the Abubakar Bukola Saraki led 8th senate to accommodate electronic transmission by amending the act, was ultimately rejected by President Buhari who continued to withhold his accent before ultimately arguing on December 10, 2018, that the 2019 polls had become too close and signing the bill into law could disrupt the polls.
Electronic transmission ended up being the most critical issue that tipped the scale in favour of Mr. Buhari at the Supreme Court, at the expense of former vice president and his major challenger at the polls, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, who argued in his suit challenging the outcome of polls that returned Buhari as president, that from the votes transmitted electronically by INEC from polling units, via its portal, he won the election.
But his argument was rejected by the apex court because the country’s electoral law does not recognise such electronic transmission.
Demand for the accommodation of electronic voting prompted agitations by civil society organizations among other stakeholders for the current senate to take up the job of amending the act, after it had sat on it for ages. It eventually did, but it had been to the surprise of many when it emerged in early July last year that the senate was introducing a new provision which provided for total ban of electronic transmission of votes.
This had formed part of a 121-page document to be laid before the senate at plenary by Kabir Gaya, Chairman of the Senate Committee on INEC. The proposed piece of legislation titled “A Bill for an Act to repeal the Electoral Act No 6, 2010 and enact the Electoral Act 2021, to regulate the conduct of Federal, State and Area Councils in the Federal Capital Territory elections, and for related matters,” had 153 sections and allowed for voluntary electronic voting by secret ballot but ruled out electronic transmission of the votes cast at the poling units.
This was contained on Page 25 of the document and subtitled procedure at election under Section 50 (2) of the bill which stated: “Voting at an election under this bill shall be in accordance with the procedure determined by the Commission (INEC) which may include electronic voting provided that the Commission shall not transmit results of election by electronic means.”
According to section. 50 (2) of the draft, “Voting at an election under this Bill shall be in accordance with the procedure determined by the Commission, which may include electronic voting, PROVIDED that the Commission shall not transmit results of election by electronic means.”
The lawmakers would yet, as anger over the decision swelled, opted to empower the Nigerian Communication Commission (NCC) to decide for the electoral body where it is applicable to do electronic transmission.
This caused even more consternation, eventually forcing the lawmakers to make concessions. The new bill eventually passed empowered INEC to transmit results electronically in some parts of the country, but only if it deems it necessary.
The draft bill read in 52(1): Voting at an election under this bill shall be by open secret ballot.
“52(2) Voting at an election under this bill shall be in accordance with the procedure determined by the commission, which may include electronic voting.
“52(3) The commission may transmit results of elections by electronic means where and when practicable.”
The bill was eventually transmitted to Buhari in November 2021, but the president declined his assent over direct primaries, noting in a letter to the speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila, “that the conduct of elections for the nomination of party candidates solely via direct primaries as envisaged by the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill 2021 has serious adverse legal, financial, economic and security consequences which cannot be accommodated at the moment considering our nation’s peculiarities.
“It also has implications on the rights of citizens to participate in the government as constitutionally ensured.”
Many had expected the lawmakers to simply amend the section that provided for direct primary and re-transmit the bill to Buhari for his signature, but they decided to insert another controversial provision banning political appointees from participating in primary elections.
“The point is that I’m not convinced that the lawmakers are interested in ensuring that the new act becomes law,” said Okoroji. “Because if they were, they have the power to override the president even if he refuses to sign the bill. In order words, it’s not a must that Buhari will sign the bill before it becomes law. The national assembly can pass into law by two-third majority if the president fails to sign it, but of course, they won’t do it.
