Opinion
Unmasking the real enemies of electoral reform
By Mon-Charles Egbo
In a democracy, there is nothing that can be more reassuring than the confidence that one’s vote counts or that the genuine wishes of the people are respected in every electoral contest.
Even the unscrupulous critics agree that electronic transmission of election results is not only strategic to strengthened and deepened democracy but in vogue, the world over. Among others, it confers legitimacy on elections sequel to inherent transparency and also encourages massive participation following the ease and convenience it delivers. And quite instructively, it does not replace but complements the usual physical transmission, thus implying that combination of both guarantees the infallibility of the results.
Hence, Nigeria’s peculiar situation and chequered political history have necessitated much emphasis on this subject. There is a raging debate about the desirability or otherwise of deploying electronic transmission of election results. And on this, Nigerians are today largely polarized along partisan and regional lines. Equally, the argument has diminished all other considerations necessary for a holistic reform of the electoral process towards credible elections. People tend to forget that credible elections are by-products of series of events, or that there is a combination of factors with varying measures of influence that determine the outcome of elections. No one is sparing thoughts for those other critical components that inter-play to bring about free, fair and peaceful elections.
But in retrospect and despite its unimpeachable merits, solely clamouring for electronic transmission of election results amounts to building something on nothing. It is not just the last step in the whole gamut of the electoral cycle, it requires other conditions which must be met for the results being transmitted to be valid and acceptable. Certainly, electronic transmission of results cannot operate in isolation if effectiveness and efficiency are the ultimate goals. Rather, the discourse should be expanded beyond internet network coverage to make progress.
As an instance, the 1993 presidential election is the freest and fairest to date. Partisanship, religion and ethnicity were played down. People were enthusiastic and vigilant, monitoring the processes. The eventual outcome reflected the aspirations of the people, though unfortunately truncated at the stage of results declaration. Even those that lost were fulfilled that indeed “the people have spoken”, in the words of Ambassador Babagana Kingibe.
But today sadly and drastically, things have changed. Most people do not believe in the electoral process anymore. Some do not even go for voter registration while the majority of the eligible deliberately do not vote. And some of those that eventually vote are either induced materially or motivated by sundry primordial sentiments. Lagos and Ogun states just had council elections of which the stories are unpalatable. The democratic space is presently devoid of robust and dynamic political cultures. Political party selection processes are largely compromised and monetised. Character, capacity and competency are lacking in political leadership across the board. Some occupy leadership positions but do not provide leadership. Some elected representatives only engage in grandstanding and at best, representing themselves and themselves alone. Mutual suspicion and intolerance today define relationships amongst tribes, political parties and religions. Allegiance and loyalty are no more to the country or constitution but officeholders.
And yet in the midst of all these, there is a massive fixation with electronic transmission of election results independent of the other components of the process as contained in the proposed amendments to the electoral laws. Ideally, it is counter-productive agitating exclusively for electronic transmission of results without providing for veritable platforms to support it. Again, it is not just about internet network availability. As such and in no particular order, these questions should agitate the minds of well-meaning citizens: Is it not common knowledge that election rigging is perpetrated by some politicians with the active connivance of some corrupt individuals representing the electoral umpire and security agencies? Is it strange that the absence of effective security around the voting arenas and collation centres, and of course, the pathways connecting the locations, undermine efforts at ensuring the integrity of the activities and eventual outcome? Are the youths protected by the campaign spending threshold provided for in the legislation? Between the independent national electoral commission, INEC, and the courts, who should disqualify candidates in elections? Is INEC truly independent? Can INEC guarantee the integrity and credibility of its representatives at various stages of the electoral process? Why is electronic voting not also being on the front burner, considering its comparative advantages?
Are the political parties driven by the principles of internal democracy? Are the politicians guided by national interest? Will electronic transfer make any difference if the process that produces the results is defective? Besides, what about the security of the internet server? Why are there still areas lacking in internet coverage despite how long Nigeria has witnessed the telecoms revolution? What about the government’s interventions targeted at rebuilding the areas that were destructively attacked by insurgents? Are there safe electoral opportunities for the internally displaced persons in various camps across the country? What is tangibly on the ground to motivate people to come out and vote and also possibly guard their ballots before they translate to results? Are the security operatives well-equipped and motivated for diligence in their duties of ensuring free and fair elections? Are those in various leadership positions committed to patriotic ideals and aspirations? Are the religious, socio-cultural and opinion leaders guided by national unity and integration? Are the words of the political leaders consistent with their actions? What examples do the leaders show their followers? Are the legislators truly engaging the people before voting on national issues? Are the constituents cooperating with the representatives by way of information exchange and idea-sharing?
And then lastly, is it not logical to be passive or outrightly shun the electoral process as bandits kill, maim, loot, rape and kidnap at will, even with firepower superior enough to bring down fighter jets?
Therefore, the real enemies of the clamoured electronic transfer of election results are not the national assembly but the combined effects of leadership, followership and institutional failures, manifesting as insecurity, corruption and infrastructure deficit, including of course those benefiting from them.
These fundamental challenges are all staring us in the faces and also without prejudice whatsoever, reasonably lend credence to the position of the president of the Senate, Ahmad Lawan.
According to him, “when the majority of Senators voted against immediate application or deployment of electronic transmission of results from the polling units, to the ward, to the local government, states and federal, they didn’t say they do not believe in electronic transmission (of election results). All of us in the Senate, 109 of us, believe that at one point, our electoral process must deploy electronic transmission so that it eases and enhances the electoral process and give it more credibility and integrity. But you see, when you have not reached that stage where you could deploy the electronic transmission from every part of the country, then you have to be very careful. And no matter what anybody may say, you cannot have about 50 percent of Nigerian voters not participating or not getting their votes counted in elections and say it doesn’t matter, that we have to start the electronic transmission. We know the evils of not transmitting results electronically but compare the evils of electronically transmitting just half of the electoral votes from Nigerians and say you have elected a President with 50 percent only. Nobody said don’t use electronic transmission at all. You use it when we reach there…..There is no way any National Assembly, not even this Ninth National Assembly will deny INEC the use of electronic transmission as part of our electoral process when we are ready for it”.
So rather than being preoccupied with only the outcome, wittingly or otherwise ignoring the process, we should pause and ponder on the peculiarities of the moment to adjust and readjust where necessary. We must embrace the truth and face the reality. Specifically, we should factor in human interferences despite the robustness of the technology. Government should be seen to take responsibility and be accountable. Citizens should dispassionately close gaps with the authorities. It is only in that can we collectively attain a new order of participatory democracy defined by strong, effective and efficient institutions that among others, guarantee a strengthened electoral system.
And primarily in this regard, the government should urgently address the already-worsened issues of poverty, unemployment and insecurity in the land. Substantially this shall decimate the menace of political corruption, voter apathy and general disenchantment propagating separatist agitations across the nation. And then as a deliberate policy to eliminate thuggery, adequate security provisions should be made at the polling and collation centres in addition to the roads connecting them. Similarly and towards checking the possible conspiracy or culpability of the electoral umpire and security agents during elections, willing electorates should be protected in participating to escort election results to collation centres. Again, the internet service providers operating in the country should be charged with definite timelines and enabling operating environments, to deploy infrastructures and networks in every part of the country. This should be effected and test-run at least one year before the 2023 general elections.
Fellow compatriots, concerted efforts should be channelled to the fore-going, rather than unwarranted attacks solely on the national assembly. However, the legislators should realize that it is not just about making laws, the capacities of the institutions should be strengthened and complemented with sustained advocacies aimed at activating the political will to implementing them to the letters, towards all-round developments and especially, curtailing the excesses of the politicians.
Meanwhile, Lawan had challenged Nigerians to use their votes to bring about the changes they desire. Hear him: “if you don’t like the set of members in the Ninth National Assembly, change all of us in 2023. Get better people but help support the system to function because that is your protection”.
Once again, electronic transmission of election results is an idea whose time has come. There is no alternative to it. But to maximally reap its inherent dividends, both government and citizens must embrace attitudinal change and institutional reforms towards national rebirth.
Egbo is the print media aide to the president of the senate
By Abiodun KOMOLAFE
The concepts of power, privilege and governance are complex and multifaceted. Power refers to the ability to influence others, while privilege denotes unearned advantages.
Governance encompasses institutions, structures and processes that regulate these dynamics. Together, these concepts raise fundamental questions about justice, equality and resource distribution.
It emphasizes the importance of considering marginalized groups’ experiences and perspectives. The main problem in Nigeria today is its political economy, which is rooted in rent-seeking and fosters a mindset that prioritizes patronage over production.
The country’s politics are characterized by a patron-client relationship, where everything revolves around government handouts rather than effective governance. This has led to a situation where “politics” in Nigeria is essentially a scramble for resources in a country with severely limited opportunities for self-improvement.
When French agronomist René Dumont wrote ‘False Starts in Africa’ in 1962, he inadvertently described Nigeria’s current state in 2025. Nigeria’s missteps have magnified themselves in the theatre of the absurd, such as the construction of a new vice presidential residence and Governor Chukwuemeka Soludo’s boasts about the lavish official residence for the governor of Anambra State, currently under construction.
It is to be noted in contradistinction that the newly sworn-in Prime Minister of Canada, Mark Carney, is looking for somewhere to live. The official residence of the prime minister, 24 Sussex Drive, the Canadian equivalent of 10 Downing Street, is in disrepair and uninhabitable. No Canadian government can dare ask the parliament to appropriate the $40m needed to refurbish the residence.
Canada’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) exceeds $2 trillion, while Nigeria’s GDP is less than $400 billion. Still, Nigeria claims to be a giant! With an electricity generation capacity of less than 6,000 megawatts, Nigeria’s proclamation seems absurd, especially when compared to cities like Johannesburg, Singapore, Hong Kong and Mumbai. Even Lagos State alone should be generating, transmitting and distributing at least 15,000 megawatts, which would be a basic expectation rather than an achievement.
Nigeria today needs a comprehensive overhaul of its governance crisis to build a new political economy and social services that are fit for purpose. Although the government is on the right path in some ways, a root-and-branch transformation is still necessary.
A notable breakthrough is the decision to recapitalize development finance institutions, such as the Bank of Industry and, crucially, the Bank of Agriculture. This move is significant in a rent-seeking state, as it addresses the need for long-term capital – a prerequisite for achieving meaningful progress.
The development finance institutions require annual recapitalization of at least N500 billion, ideally N1 trillion. Achieving this necessitates a thorough cost evaluation of the government’s machinery, starting with the full implementation of the Oronsaye Committee’s recommendations.
The resulting cost savings can then be redirected to development finance institutions and essential social services like primary healthcare. Furthermore, the government should be bolder, if it can afford to be so, especially since there’s no discernible opposition on offer At the moment, the Nigerian political establishment across the board appears to be enamored by the position put forward by the leader of the Russian revolution, Vladimir Lenin, after the failed putsch. Lenin wrote the classic, ‘What is to be done?’
His observation is that revolutions do not take place at times of grinding poverty. They do so during periods of relatively rising prosperity. Significant sections of the Nigerian establishment believe that relatively rising prosperity could trigger off social discontent.
In their own interest, they had better be right. The caveat is that Lenin wrote ‘What’s to be Done’ in 1905. The world has moved on and changed since the conditions that led to the failure of the attempted takeover of government in Russia in 1905. Therefore, the Nigerian political establishment, for reasons of self-preservation, had better put on its thinking cap. Addressing power and privilege in governance requires collective action, institutional reforms and a commitment to promoting social justice. Nigeria currently lacks a leadership recruitment process, which can only be established if political parties are willing to develop a cadre. Unfortunately, the country is dealing with Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) instead. It’s rare to find leadership in Nigeria operating political boot camps to recruit and groom youths for future leadership roles.
This might be why many young people have a misguided understanding of politics, viewing it as merely a means of sharing the nation’s commonwealth. Mhairi Black was elected to the British House of Commons at 20 years old.
However, the key point is that Black had started becoming involved in politics at a young age. By the time she was elected, she had already gained significant experience, effectively becoming a veteran in the field. In Nigeria, politics is often seen as one of the few avenues for self-fulfillment. However, the economy is stagnant, with few jobs created in the public sector and limited investment opportunities.
This is a far cry from the 1950s and 1960s, when political parties were more substantial. Today, it’s worth asking how many Nigerian political parties have functional Research Departments. Besides, what socialization into any philosophy or ideology do our politicians have? Similarly to former Governor Rotimi Amaechi, many of those who currently hold power are motivated to stay in politics due to concerns about economic stability.
Of course, that’s why the Lagos State House of Assembly has had to revert itself. It is the same challenge that has reduced the traditional institution to victims of Nigeria’s ever-changing political temperature. It is the reason an Ogbomoso indigene is not interested in what happened between Obafemi Awolowo and Ladoke Akintola.
It is also the reason an Ijebuman sees an Ogbomoso man as his enemy without bothering to dig up the bitter politics that ultimately succeeded in putting the two families on the path of permanent acrimony. Of course, that’s why we have crises all over the place! May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Nigeria!
KOMOLAFE wrote from Ijebu-Jesa, Osun State, Nigeria (ijebujesa@yahoo.co.uk; 08033614419)
Byabiodun KOMOLAFE
Rivers State is now under emergency rule, and it’s likely to remain so for the next six months, unless a drastic change occurs.
If not managed carefully, this could mark the beginning of a prolonged crisis.
In situations like this, opinions tend to be divergent. For instance, some people hold the notion that the security situation and the need to protect the law and public order justified President Bola Tinubu’s proclamation of a state of emergency in, and the appointment of a sole administrator for Rivers State.
However, others view this act as ‘unconstitutional’, ‘reckless’, ‘an affront on democracy’, and ‘a political tool to intimidate the opposition’. When we criticize governments for unmet expectations, we often rely on our own perspectives and biases.
Our individual identities and prejudices shape our criticism. However, it’s essential to recognize that not all criticism is equal. Protesting within the law is fundamentally different from protests that descend into illegality. Once illegality creeps in, the legitimacy of the protest is lost.
As John Donne wrote in ‘Devotions Upon Emergent Occasions’, “Never send to know for whom the bell tolls.” A protest is legitimate when it aligns with societal norms, values and laws. But when protests are marred by violence or sabotage, they lose credibility. Without credibility, protests become ineffective.
Regarding the validity or otherwise of the emergency rule in Rivers State, it is imperative that the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governors approach the Supreme Court immediately. They should seek a definitive clarification on whether the proclamation is ultra vires or constitutional.
For whatever it’s worth, they owe Nigerians that responsibility!May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Nigeria!
Abiodun KOMOLAFE,ijebujesa@yahoo.co.uk; 08033614419 – SMS only.
Abba Dukawa
The political crisis began in December 2023, when Governor Fubara ordered the demolition of the state House of Assembly complex, which remains unrebuilt to this day. This act has effectively paralyzed the legislative arm, disrupting the state’s system of checks and balances.
The Supreme Court highlighted the severity of this situation on February 28, 2025, emphasizing the absence of a functional government in Rivers State and the executive’s role in collapsing the legislative arm, thereby creating a governance void
Additionally, recent reports indicate that militants have been vandalizing pipelines and issuing threats without any intervention from the state government, raising concerns about the state’s security and economic stability.Given Rivers State’s crucial role in the country’s economy, this situation necessitates urgent and cautious intervention from the federal government.Despite interventions from various stakeholders, including Tinubu himself, the crisis has persisted
.It’s worth noting that Tinubu is the third president to invoke Section 305 of the Constitution, after Ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo and Former President Goodluck Jonathan.
President Bola Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State has sparked intense debate about its necessity and potential motivations. During his nationwide speech, Tinubu warned that this decision could set off a chain of unpredictable events, potentially leading to radical ideologies and extremist tendencies.
Critics argue that Tinubu’s decision was unnecessary and politically motivated, particularly given his connection to Minister of the Federal Capital Territory Nyesom Wike, who is accused of being the “arrowhead” of the crisis. Some believe that Tinubu’s administration aims to remove Governor Fubara, perceived as hostile to the 2027 Tinubu/Wike project.Ultimately, the motivations behind Tinubu’s decision remain unclear, and its implications for Rivers State and Nigeria as a whole are yet to be fully seen.
Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has strongly opposed President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State and his suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, and members of the Rivers State President Tinubu, in his national address, cited rising political tensions and recent acts of pipeline vandalism as justification for the emergency declaration.House of Assembly. President Tinubu, in his national address, cited rising political tensions and recent acts of pipeline vandalism as justification for the emergency declaration.
The NBA pointed to Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution, which governs the procedure for declaring a state of emergency. While this section grants the President emergency powers, it does not allow for the removal or suspension of elected officials. The NBA stressed that the only constitutional method for removing a governor or deputy governor is through impeachment as outlined in Section 188.
Furthermore, the removal of lawmakers must adhere to electoral laws and constitutional provisions insisted that a state of emergency does not equate to an automatic dissolution of an elected government, and any attempt to do so is an overreach of executive power.
Also Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has strongly condemned President Bola Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State, calling it an “assault on democracy” that must be denounced in the strongest possible terms . Wazirin Adamawa argues that Tinubu’s administration is responsible for the chaos in Rivers State, either by enabling it or failing to prevent it. He emphasizes that the President should bear full responsibility for any compromise of federal infrastructure in the state, rather than punishing the people of Rivers State with a state of emergency.
Abubakar also accuses president Tinubu of being a partisan actor in the political turmoil in Rivers, and his refusal to prevent the escalation is seen as “disgraceful to the people of Rivers” The former Vice President believes that the destruction of national infrastructure in Rivers State is a direct result of the President’s failure to act, and punishing the people of Rivers State would be undemocratic.
In his statement, former vice president asserts that the declaration of a state of emergency “reeks of political manipulation and outright bad faith. He urges that the people of Rivers State should not be punished for the political gamesmanship between the governor and Tinubu’s enablers in the federal government. Other analyst believes that the situation in Rivers State, though politically tense, does not meet the constitutional threshold for the removal of elected officials.
For a state of emergency to be declared, Section 305(3) of the Constitution outlines specific conditions, including:
1. War or external aggression against Nigeria. Imminent danger of invasion or war. A breakdown of public order and safety to such an extent that ordinary legal measures are insufficient.
Other reasons for such decisions to be enforced are clear danger to Nigeria’s existence and Occurrence of any disaster or natural calamity affecting a state or a part of it. Where public danger constitutes a threat to the Federation.
Since the state of the emergency in Rivers state has been promulgation, political watchers questions whether the political crisis in Rivers State has reached the level of a complete breakdown of law that has warranting the removal of the Governor and his administration. Political disagreements, legislative conflicts, or executive-legislative tensions do not constitute a justification for emergency rule.
Had been the president remain filmed Such conflicts should have been resolved through legal and constitutional mechanisms, including the judiciary, rather than executive fiat.
A state of emergency is an extraordinary measure that must be invoked strictly within constitutional limits. The removal of elected officials under the pretext of emergency rule is unconstitutional and unacceptable.Tinubu’s administration decision to declare a state of emergency has been met with mixed reactions. Some argue that it was necessary to restore sanity to the state and ensure the country’s stability. Others,, believe that it was an unnecessary decision that could have dire economic and security implications for the state and Nigeria at large.
Was declaration for Rivers state is necessary or political motivation? President Bola Amed Tinubu is fully aware that the declaration of State of Emergency in a prevalent democratic system is not the solution to the self-inflicted crisis bedeviling the State.
What Tinubu needed most was to call Wike, his Minister of FCT, to order. The former governor Wike is the arrowhead of the crisis bedeviling the State.
Now what the president Tinubu decision for the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State was an unnecessary decision” that could have dire economic and security implications for the state and Nigeria at large.
Other views whether president decisions of keeping his ally, Minister of the Federal Capital Territory Nyesom Wike, is worth jeopardizing Nigeria’s economy.The keen watcher of events regarded the decision as a display of unpardonable mediocrity and diabolic partisanship geared towards 2027.
Tinubu administration wants to use the excuse of the political instability and other security challenges in Rivers to remove Governor FUBURA from the POWER considered hostile to the minister of the Federal Capital Territory or TInubu/Wiki diabolic partisanship geared towards 2027 election.
During his speeches Mr. President, blaming only the state governor and House of Assembly for the crisis in Rivers State is like expecting one iron to make a loud sound – it’s unrealistic and ignores the roles of others, including the former governor and a cabinet member in your administration.
Let us not forget; The situation in Rivers state is indeed complex, with President Tinubu’s intervention aiming to restore order, but also raising important questions about the balance between federal intervention and state autonomy. Invoking a state of emergency to suspend elected officials is a drastic measure that may set a worrying precedent, especially if not handled carefully.
The appointment of a retired military officer as the state’s administrator also raises concerns about the militarization of a democratic government. This move may be perceived as an attempt to exert federal control over the state, rather than allowing democratic processes to unfold, the initial six-month period of emergency rule, with provisions for extension, could lead to prolonged federal control. This is why it’s essential to establish clear timelines and measurable objectives to ensure a timely return to democratic governance.
Some of the key concerns that need to be addressed include: The potential for abuse of power*: The suspension of elected officials and the appointment of a military administrator could be seen as an attempt to consolidate federal power.
– *The impact on democratic institutions*: The emergency rule could undermine the democratic institutions in Rivers state and set a precedent for future interventions.
– *The need for transparency and accountability*: The federal government must ensure that the emergency rule is transparent, accountable, and subject to regular review. Ultimately, finding a balance between restoring order and respecting democratic institutions is crucial. The federal government must tread carefully to avoid exacerbating the situation and ensure a peaceful resolution.
Dukawa public affairs commentator and can be reached at abbahydukawa@gmail.com
Kogi: CP Dantawaye engage stakeholders in Ijumu, emphasises security, community policing
Fidelity Bank equips entrepreneurs for global trade success with EMP 18
Reports of Justice Agim accompanying Wike to UNICAL convocation false, misleading Supreme Court
-
News1 week agoBill to establish National Cashew Production and Research Institute in Kogi passes first reading in Senate
-
News1 week agoShehu Sani debunks Governor Uba Sani’s alleged diversion of LG funds, challenges El-Rufai to publicly tender evidence
-
News1 week agoReport of attack on Wike’s Port Harcourt residence false, misleading – Police
-
News7 days agoPlateau gov’t expresses concern over violence in Shendam LGA, calls for calm
-
Sports1 week agoMerino gives Arsenal win over Chelsea
-
Politics5 days agoOpposition leaders announce coalition to challenge Tinubu in 2027
-
Interview1 week agoSenators Natasha-Akpabio saga should have been resolved privately – Rev. Mrs Emeribe
-
News1 week agoNatasha uncovers arrest plot after reported Akpabio to IPU in New York