A proposal for creation of an Electoral Offences Commission hit rocky reefs in uncommon waters last week. The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) objected to the idea, citing its potential to duplicate functions already vested in other agencies in existence. The anti-graft body’s position conflicted with an advocacy by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), among other stakeholders, for urgent imperative of establishing such organ dedicated to holding electoral offenders to account.
At a public hearing by the House of Representatives Committee on Electoral Matters last Tuesday, INEC plied its long standing argument for creation of a dedicated body to curb impunity in the Nigerian electoral process that has militated against efforts to reform the system for the better. INEC Chairman Professor Mahmood Yakubu said the electoral body, as currently saddled by law to prosecute electoral offences, lacked capacity to be effective in view of the magnitude of impunity by political players and the fact of the agency being burdened with other responsibilities in core electoral management functions.
Besides, the current framing of the law makes the task of penalising electoral offenders somewhat fractious, because whereas INEC has the duty to prosecute offenders, it has no powers to arrest or investigate them prior to prosecution. On the other hand, besides that an electoral offences body will be involved in no other duties than dealing justice to electoral offenders, it will combine necessary powers as would make holding offenders to account seamless. Moreover, the bill being proposed prescribes stiff penalties up to 20 years of imprisonment or N40 million fine for an electoral offender, as against tokenistic penalties stipulated under Electoral (Amendment) Act 2020, among other extant laws.
“It is clear that the reform of our electoral process cannot be complete without effective sanctions against violators of our laws,” the electoral boss said, explaining: “At present, INEC is saddled with the responsibility of prosecuting electoral offenders under the Electoral Act. This has been very challenging for the commission. For instance, since the 2015 general election, 125 cases of electoral offences have been filed in various courts, of which 60 convictions have been secured so far, including the most recent one in Akwa Ibom State.” According to him, the bill being proposed is a critical legislation and has been part of all national conversations on constitutional and electoral reforms for the past 13 years. He recalled that Justice Mohammed Uwais-led Committee on Electoral Reforms recommended the establishment of the commission in 2009, which was re-echoed by the Sheikh Ahmed Lemu committee following the post-election violence of 2011. More recently, the same structure was proposed by the Senator Ken Nnamani-led Committee on Constitutional and Electoral Reform in 2017. “Similar recommendations are contained in reports of police investigations, INEC administrative enquiries, court judgments, reports by the National Human Rights Commission, as well as several accredited election observers,” he added.
Read Also: Stop sending Nigerians to foreign prisons, women tell President, EFCC
Against arguments from necessity for a slim government bureaucracy, Yakubu said exceptions could be made, just like was done in cases of other critical national situations like the fight against corruption. He explained: “For those who argue that the solution does not lie in expanding the federal bureaucracy by creating a new commission, we believe that the National Electoral Offences Commission should be seen as an exception. While there are other security agencies that deal with economic and financial crimes, I am yet to hear anyone who, in good conscience, thinks that it is unnecessary to have established the anti-corruption agencies.”
Incidentally, EFCC is a beneficiary of the exception pointed out by the INEC boss. But the thrust of the case the anti-graft agency made against creation of a dedicated electoral offences body was that there should be a slim government bureaucracy amidst existing agencies that purportedly could discharge functions to be vested in the proposed body. Assistant Commandant Deborah Ademu-Eteh, who represented EFCC Chairman Abdulrasheed Bawa at the public hearing, argued that electoral offences were already covered under the penal and criminal codes, the Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Act (2000) and the Economic and Financial Crimes (Establishment) Act, 2004. According to her, elections are seasonal events, and existing security agencies should rather be strengthened to prosecute electoral offences.
“There is no need to create an agency solely for the purpose of investigating and prosecuting electoral offences, most especially when our electoral process is seasonal in nature being that elections are held once in four years in the country,” Ademu-Eteh said, adding: “Furthermore, it is our suggestion that the existing law enforcement agencies should be strengthened to achieve maximum output instead of creating a new agency of investigation and prosecution of electoral offences, in the light of the ongoing plan to implement the Oronsanye Committee’s proposal by the Federal Government of Nigeria.”
Besides the argument for exception adduced by the INEC chairman, we found it curious that EFCC is bothered by duplication of functions when its own present functions are included in the regular duties of the Nigerian Police. Going by its logic, EFCC should never have been created, or it should rather be a unit of the police establishment. The same way EFCC’s efficiency would have been hampered under the police is the same way prosecution of electoral crimes isn’t working under the current arrangement and the conventional judicial system with its notorious encumbrances. Then, there is the inevitable fact that impunity has persisted amidst lame tackle by existing agencies. The INEC boss said that most of the time, electoral offenders are only tools of big political actors who are the real beneficiaries of the offences committed, but who never get in the line of fire of security agencies and eventual prosecution. It is the absence of an organ like the proposed commission that these stalwarts are exploiting.
Yet, electoral offences mar the electoral process and must be reined in if we would make votes count for effective political representation. Moreover, perhaps the strongest argument is that no one knows the political terrain better than INEC. The electoral body knows where the shoe pinches and should be heeded in its strident call for a dedicated electoral offences organ. Actually, we believe that the body should have been in place long before now.