Introduction
Globally, increased recognition of the
relationship between credible elections and credible governance processes has
given rise to increasing demands for freer and more credible elections, which
has, in turn, sharply brought Election Management Bodies into the public
limelight. Today, increasing demands for transparency and accountability, by
stakeholders, the traditional and especially the new social media as well as
the need to adhere to global best practices in election administration and
operations all compel EMBs to undertake very complex, time-specific, and costly
operations under the most intense public scrutiny. While in the past, concern
with elections has largely been a preserve of states and politicians, today, elections
are the subject of widespread scrutiny from a range of organized interests
within and outside national boundaries.
Throughout the world, the active
participation of civil society organizations (CSOs) has been widely
acknowledged as significant in deepening and consolidating the democratic
experiences of nations. Broadly, CSOs have applied political pressure for
reform that have in a number of cases brought down authoritarian regimes and in
others led to the expansion of the political space through the enhancement of
citizens’ participation, increased transparency and accountability of
governance and the provision of voice to some of the most vulnerable and
marginalized groups in society. The Arab Spring and the expansion of democratic
spaces across the West African Region from Niger to Senegal are a few examples
worth mentioning.
In more specific ways, CSOs have in quite a
number of commendable cases actively supported Electoral Management Bodies in
managing the electoral process. In the main, they have contributed immensely in
educating voters, in bringing issues of concern to pubic limelight, in ensuring
that global best electoral practices are enshrined through observation, and in
the provision of experienced electoral support. We saw this not long ago in
Senegal, where the civil society organizations constructively engaged the
Electoral Management Body and assisted it to re-appropriate its primary mission
of conducting free, fair, and credible elections. In Nigeria, Civil Society
Organizations have contributed a lot not just in the expansion of the
democratic space before and since 1999, but also in pushing for institutional
reforms in the political and electoral processes that have amongst others,
partly resulted in the establishment of the Uwais Panel that paved the way for
significant electoral reforms.
The New Commission: June 2010
In administrating elections, an EMB has
responsibility and obligation to be professional, transparent, and
non-partisan. Since its establishment n June 2010, the new Commission sought to
achieve these objectives by ensuring that the manner by which elections are
prepared and held will be more inclusive, participatory, and transparent. It is
in recognition of this that the Commission had consistently striven to carry
along all stakeholders in the electoral process in planning and executing its
activities. It is in response to this and to the various demands from
stakeholders in the electoral process that the Commission decided a new
bio-metric voter’s register is indispensable to credibility of any
election it may conduct; that a coordinated engagement with security agencies
under the umbrella of the Inter-Agency Consultative Committee on Election
Security (ICCES) is vital to the security of elections; that the use of members
of the National Youth Service Corps Scheme (NYSC) as well as University Staff
and other Professional Bodies as Ad-hoc Staff will tremendously enhance the
credibility of our elections; and that periodic engagement with political
parties, civil society organizations and development partners is necessary for
achieving the very difficult and complex task of professionalizing the
Commission and the conduct of free and credible elections.
The new Commission very early recognized that
CSOs as key stakeholders have played significant instrumental roles in the
success stories recorded since its inception in 2010. The support from CSOs
further strengthened the Commission’s resolve to professionalize, to create a
level playing ground for all political parties and contestants, and to do all
it possibly can to have free, fair and credible elections in 2011. It is this
same resolve that derives the Commission’s planning towards 2015; it is also
the same resolve that informs the current dialogue with Civil Society Organizations.
INEC-Civil Society Engagement: from
2011-2015
The active participation of all stakeholders
in the political process remains one of the most important issues the
Commission insists on. In the run-up to the preparations for the 2011 General
Elections, such kinds of engagements were a constant feature of the operations
of this Commission. With specific reference to Civil Society Organizations,
this engagement took place on several fronts. These include, amongst others:
involvement of CSOs in the voter education programmes of the Commission;
participation in election observation; engagement in the registration process,
as well as participation in the various post-election activity meetings organized
at various fora since 2011. Through all these, CSOs have sent periodic reports
and assessments of our electoral process, and we have indeed taken note of all
these as can be seen in the improvements put in place in subsequent elections
since 2011. In what follows, I would like to focus on only three issues in
detail to further demonstrate the degree of engagement between INEC and CSOs.
Registration of Voters
The voter registration exercise was planned
for January 15 – 29, 2011, using Direct Data Capturing (DDC) machines. However,
in response to popular demands to register eligible voters not yet captured,
the Commission extended the time of registration to February 7, 2011.
Thereafter, a display of the register of voters was made from 14 to 19 February,
during which claims and objections were received and addressed. After the
display and review of the register and consolidation of all outstanding data,
the commission on March 2, 2011 certified a final Register of Voters containing
73,528,040 voters on which the April 2011 Elections were conducted.
From virtually all accounts, the voter
registration was a success, given the tight deadline and the difficult
circumstance that the Commission had to undergo in order to finalize the
Register of Voters. Civil Society Organizations actively participated in the
process from giving information, mobilizing prospective registrants and
observing the process and reporting potential problems areas for the
Commission’s intervention. Indeed, towards the end of the registration period,
the massive information received from CSOs and other stakeholders helped the
Commission to deploy registration equipment in heavily populated areas that
substantially eased the queues. CSOs may not be in a position to play a similar
role as we move towards 2015 because a registration on the scale of 2011 is not
being contemplated; but they can play a huge role in the up-coming Continuous
Voter Registration Exercise, which the Commission is preparing to launch early
in 2013.
General Elections
The General Elections were held in April –
May 2011 across the country. The original election schedule by the Commission
called for the holding of the elections on April 2, 9 and 16 for the national
assembly, presidential and governorship elections respectively. However, due to
logistic problems and with full stakeholder consultation, the elections were
rescheduled to April 9, 16, and 26. Some elections, which were postponed for
various reasons were conducted on April 28 and May 7.
As with the voter registration, CSO support
before, during, and after the elections was commendable. Such support included
the mobilization of citizens to vote, observing the elections, as well as
organizing a forum on voter education. Perhaps one of the most
significant contributions of civil society organizations in the 2011 General
Elections was the creation of different election situation rooms by different
groups (e.g. EiE and the Coalition of CSOs under PLAC). The Situation Rooms
helped to process information from the field that was fed to INEC including
challenges such as: late or non-arrival of election materials and personnel,
cases of ballot box snatching or diversion of electoral materials,
identification of conflict flash points, as well as actual outbreaks. Such
independent information in many instances helped to corroborate information
from INEC’s own sources and was vital in designing prompt interventions that
addressed issues before they became major problems. This role remains key in
strengthening our internal monitoring processes, and I would like you to spend
some time on this issue so as to further refine it.
Registration and Election Review Committee
(RERC)
As part of its post-election activities and
on-going lesson-learning process, the Commission inaugurated a Committee of
experts on election issues called the Registration and Election Review
Committee in August 2011 to conduct an evaluation of the voters’ registration
and general elections. This was to deepen the process to continuously improve
the Commissions operations, enhance its organizational capacity through a
better understanding of the strengths and weakness, revamp its planning,
coordination and execution capabilities and further deepen its relations with
critical stakeholders in the electoral process. Both the membership of the
Committee as well as the consultations it held across the country in the course
of its work were significantly informed by the participation of CSOs.
Towards 2015
These are just three of the many ways the
Commission and CSOs have constructively engaged over the past two or so years.
As we move towards 2015, some of the old challenges we have seen in the conduct
of both the registration and the elections will recur; some new challenges will
emerge, and all of these will require the re-enforcement of some old ways of
engaging and imaginatively creating new ways to address emergent challenges.
This Dialogue’s key objective is precisely to assess these engagements and to
rethink fresh ways of engagement as we move towards the 2015 general elections.
As we do this, we should bear in mind the cardinal objective of the Commission,
which is to ensure that the 2015 General Elections are even free, fairer, and
more credible than the 2011 General Elections and of those that the Commission
conducted since then.
More specifically, I would urge you to focus
on enhancing citizen participation in the electoral process; thinking of newer
and more creative ways of observing elections; and making input as to how INEC
can continuously improve transparency and credibility of the electoral process.
Let me conclude by placing on record once
more the Commission’s profound appreciation to all of you for your
contributions to bringing about substantial improvements to the Nigerian
electoral process. Of course, there is still room for improvements and the
challenges that remain are still formidable. We cannot therefore rest on our
Oars; we must remain engaged and we must continue to partner to bring about
even more substantial and enduring improvements to the credibility of our
electoral process in 2015 and beyond.
Thank you.
Thursday, 27 November 2014
THE ROLE OF INEC IN THE CONDUCT OF 2015 GENERAL ELECTION
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Write comments