Interview: Why electoral reforms must be concluded in 2009 - Oshiomhole September 29, 2007 | posted by Mobolaji Aluko (Archives)

---

GUARDIAN
September 29, 2007

Why electoral reforms must be concluded in 2009, by Oshiomhole

Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, former Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) President and Action Congress (AC) governorship candidate in the April 14, 2007 election, spoke in Benin recently on how to make the electoral reforms effective among others. Benin Bureau Chief, MIKE OSUNDE was there. Excerpts

HOW do you see President Umaru Yar'Adua's electoral reform effort?

It is a good idea. It is very clear that Nigeria cannot go through the electoral process again and come out intact so, the need for Electoral reform is obvious. I also think it is important that they started the exercise early because if they start it at a later date as some people are arguing and on the eve of another election, people will be biased. People will be looking at certain personalities and try to make law to suit their convenience.

Certainly, this is just the best time because people are still angry over what happened and I believe that anger will fire our appetite to all actively engage the panel to ensure that they look at all the issues. It is not just about a new Electoral Law, but it is also about the kind of people who are appointed as Electoral Commissioners. Under the present law, you can nominate party supporters. Many of the Electoral Commissioners are Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) notchers.

It makes sense to have appointed non-politicians into the panel, both the institutional representations and individuals who are distinguished in various fields and have experience in electoral and judicial matters. They have had the burden of interpreting or adjudicating on electoral disputes. So, I am 100 per cent in support of what President Yar'Adua has done and I think all Nigerians should be encouraged to support the process.

What kind of electoral reforms are you looking forward to?

I am looking at total overhaul of the system. Now, if you trace the history of some of the people who are currently involved in the electoral system, they have been involved in election rigging, even in the Second Republic. Some of the INEC electoral commissioners were very active in the Shagari days. So, they have become more or less professional riggers. There must be something in the law that must address the issue of the people who are appointed and the character of people who can be appointed. It should not be job for the boys. And who appoints? To whom is INEC accountable? I expect the panel to invite memoranda, public debates, hearings through which political parties, civil societies; individuals and even politicians can go and canvass their positions.

Would you canvass the adoption of Option A4?

That is okay. But if you have Maurice Iwu as INEC Chief to operate Option A4 and you have Obasanjo as Commander-in-Chief and President presiding over it, the result would not be different.

I am not against it because it has a lot of attractions and at least, it worked. But it would be misleading just to think that it was that perfect. You have to look at the fact that Babangida did not interfere with the process. He encouraged INEC to maintain a substantial level of independence as far as the conduct of elections was concerned. He did not use the police for or against any of the candidates. Then, you have an INEC that was also ready to play the role of an umpire. If you just look at Option A4 and the political environment under which it operated and the quality of the individuals that operated it, you would be mistaken to repeat now.

What about funding of the INEC?

I don't think the greatest problem of INEC was funding. This INEC was over-funded. They got more money than they are able to account for. They budgeted for equipment, which they never used, and they probably never procured and the money was released. Autonomy goes with responsibilities. If elections are so expensive, then you will not be able to conduct one. So, the problem goes beyond funding. This is not to say that I do not recognise the need for financial autonomy.

In terms of finding explanations for the last fraud, it was not because of any financial constraints or lack of financial autonomy. Unfortunately everything is looked at in terms of politics. It would have made sense for President Yar'Adua to commission a judicial inquiry to really find out what really were the problems and what really went wrong. That would have been something worth investigating.

I am convinced that three things need to be looked at. Firstly, the legal framework; secondly the quality of personnel and how they are appointed and thirdly, the overall attitude of the President. Will he not use the police? Can the President call the Inspector General of Police and say, look, the police must not encourage fraud, the police must police for the nation, not for the ruling party? Do you have a president who appreciates that it is not a shame if he presides over the defeat of his own party just as it happened in Sierra-Leone when the opposition won and the President lost?

The police say that there is no constitutional role for them during election and the Electoral Act does provide a role for them...

You and I, as ordinary citizens, know that we have obligations if we see a crime being committed by using reasonable means to prevent it and certainly not to aid it. Is there any law that says that the police should facilitate the stealing of ballot papers? Does the Electoral Act say that Mobile policemen should be assigned to the ruling party chieftains so that they now aid the stealing of ballot boxes? It is not about what the law says, it is about the kind of instructions the Inspector-General of police gives to his men and women in the force which will itself flow from the kind of orders he receives from the President.

What time frame would you suggest for the electoral reforms to be concluded?

I think this should be concluded within two years to election because after two years, electioneering politics would start. Once it starts, only a few people that have some degree of statesmanship will see beyond what is critically convenient for them. I also think that the actors should know what the rules are before the game begins, not after.

So far, how would you assess the performance of the new administration, especially in Edo State?

Unfortunately, I am not in a position to evaluate the Edo State Government because I hold the view that we cannot assess it because it doesn't have any moral authority to be there. It is a stolen thing, which we are trying to retrieve.

I guess in Edo State, we are still celebrating fraud. The state television tells us that the roads are now perfect, but we, the ordinary people still find out that we need to have some flying boats to be able to move from one street to the other. We are told that there is no more crime but even today (last week) as I was going to the Tribunal, I saw three dead bodies in an open van with people wearing red and I am told those are SARS. This means that youths are still being felled by the day in the name of robbery. When a nation sees the citizens as a burden rather than as assets, the real challenge of preventing crime and getting young people busy, of creating employment to engage people who want to work is not being discussed.

I listened to the confession recently of a young man on the television. He was arrested for armed robbery. According to him, he was to go to school; the wrong people collected money from him for admission and the admission was not real. Along the line, he got stranded and one thing led to the other and he found himself joining a gang. Imagine if the education system worked, there is transparency in the system and the poor can get admission without godfathers. Then, that young man may have been spared. Now, he is a candidate to be wasted. You criminalise the people in the morning and in the evening you waste them. I think the police's burden will be less if we have an agenda that seek to keep the youths busy, not the one that celebrates criminalising the youths by carrying out extra-judicial killings.

What is the way forward?

Not until we get the political system right. So, long as you have rogues in power, they cannot govern for the benefits of the majority. The promise of democracy is that the ordinary men and women have to determine who runs. Therefore, when rulers are before the electorate, they behave like chickens because the electorate is the King. But in a fraudulent system like the one we are in, where one or two godfathers can super-impose candidates on the electorate irrespective of what the people think, the emphasis is what is convenient to the godfathers and not what is good for the people.

---