The Independent National Electoral
Commission’s Resident Electoral Commissioner for Akwa Ibom State, Mr.
Mike Igini, examines the likely impact of President Muhammadu Buhari’s
decision to decline his assent to the 2018 (Amendment) Electoral Bill,
among other issues, in this interview with ALEXANDER OKERE
The 2018 Electoral
(Amendment) Bill has been a subject of controversy between the National
Assembly and the Presidency. What is your reaction as an officer in the
commission?
This issue should be handled between
both arms of government, given that we have done the needful since 2016
when the commission made submissions to the parliament. Some of us
(stakeholders) have spoken on the need to act on time on this subject
matter to avoid the scenario of 2015. Unfortunately, this is where we
are today talking about controversy when we are now counting days to the
2019 elections. The controversy has now taken a partisan dimension of
‘they versus us,’ cherry-picking, instead of a common mission of
strengthening the electoral system for the sustenance of our democracy.
However, issues around elections are not peculiar to Nigeria. Around the
world, electoral reforms always have proponents and opponents but the
usual expectation is for political leaders to put national interest
above all other interests.
But there are still some
people who feel that the refusal of the President to sign the Electoral
Bill might spell doom for the 2019 elections. Are those fears not
justified?
Any apocalyptic projection of doom about
the 2019 elections should be more about the violence that politicians
are planning to use to undermine the electoral process, through the
recruitment of thugs, importation of fake army and police uniforms (some
of which have been intercepted by the Customs) and the various security
reports of arms build-up by politicians. The absence of a new Electoral
Act should not be a basis for not having credible elections in 2019,
because the constitution donated to INEC, to the exclusion of any other
body under Paragragh 15 of the Third Schedule, the power to “organise,
undertake and supervise” the conduct of elections into certain offices
listed in the constitution. Specifically, Section 52(2) of the 2015
amendments says that, “voting in an election, under this Act, shall be
in accordance with the procedure determined by the lndependent National
Electoral Commission.” What else do we really need again, at least for
now? Even without this amendment to the Electoral Act, the constitution
is supreme and its provisions shall have binding force on all
authorities and persons. And the provision of Section 160 of the
constitution, which the Electoral Act has now adopted, is clear on the
powers given to INEC to make its own rules and determine the procedure
to be used in the conduct of an election.
In view of the proposed
electronic transmission of results in the new bill, does INEC’s
insistence to conduct the polls with the existing Act seem to mean that
the umpire is against efforts to make the elections freer, fairer and
more credible?
Electronic transmission of election
results (as a means of checking the manual step-by-step statutory
recording in Section 73 of the Act of the outcome of the poll from
polling units to the last point of collation) has been in the pilot
stage since the 2012 governorship election when it was first used in
Cross River State when l was the REC and it has been used in several
elections since then as pilot. This is why I say that those who think
that there is laxity in the current laws may be in for surprises because
the last electoral amendment was explicit in stating that the
operational rules and procedures of how elections will be conducted is
at the discretion of INEC.
You said in a recent
interview that INEC would ensure that votes count. But going by past
reports of alleged rigging and the manual collation of results, how does
INEC hope to achieve that promise this time round?
Nigerians would agree that we are making
steady progress in our electoral process as evidenced by the 2011, 2015
and the various off-season elections that we have conducted, which are a
remarkable improvement on previous elections, in terms of process,
outcome and legitimacy. No doubt, a rigged or manipulated election
connotes the absence of an election. So, minimising irregularities and
variance from the expected conduct of elections is what determines how
well election managers perform. Unfortunately, the outcome of elections
has become an end in itself in Nigeria. You see people closing factories
and businesses to become politicians. Why? We need a reset of our
society to correct these anomalies or we will continue to find people
who are desperate to beat the system as we try to improve it.
Vote-buying is like a new monster threatening the electoral process. What is the way out?
The menace of vote-buying that has
assumed the level of an epidemic is a direct response of the political
elite to the robust electoral tools that INEC has developed. These tools
now make election rigging with compromised electoral officials
difficult. Now politicians and, painfully, the very electorate that we
are trying to secure the sanctity of their choices made through the
ballot are now conniving with politicians to sell and buy votes.
Vote-buying is inimical to development because once votes are sold to
the highest bidder, elections, which are meant to hold elected officials
accountable for their actions and promises, will lose its utility. I
have stated previously and I will state it here again that the best
response is the enforcement of Sections 124 and 130 that clearly spelt
out these electoral offences in the Act. If this menace is not properly
addressed, it is definitely a road to perdition. The whole essence of
the political endeavour (elections) is for the maximisation of the
welfare of the society, and vote-buying will terminate that dream.
Vote-buying debases the sanctity of the ballot and it undermines the
legitimacy of the process.
The United States and some
organisations have predicted that there might be violence during the
election. What is INEC doing, as a stakeholder, to ensure that does not
happen?
A successful election is the
responsibility of all stakeholders, including INEC, security agencies,
political parties and their candidates, the electorate and others.
Securing the environment for the peaceful conduct of elections is the
responsibility of security agencies and we are engaging them on this as
well as calling for absolute neutrality in the discharge of this
all-important responsibility for the good of our country.
In Akwa Ibom State where you
are the REC, there has been series of political drama and increased
tension and the PDP has alleged the planned use of federal might. Are
you worried about what is to come?
I have made it known to all that we will
provide a level-playing field for all. I am resolute to ensure that the
people of Akwa-Ibom State determine the outcome of the elections by
their votes and only through their votes as cast in the ballot.
So, here in this state under my watch,
original results sheets and ballot papers shall be delivered to the
entire 2,980 polling units in the 31 local government areas and these
original result sheets would be audited and verified by duly accredited
party agents and observers before the commencement of the poll by 8am.
On the so-called federal might that journalists keep talking about, let
me repeat what l have been saying since the 2011 and 2015 elections that
INEC elections are not the so-called local government elections
conducted by states where all contested offices are won 100 per cent by
the party in government and where they use what you call might. The
damage that the states are doing to our democracy in the 774 local
government areas is terrible and if that is replicated in elections
conducted by INEC, there will be widespread disruption of public life
and an end to this democracy. So, no such might will be.