The recently concluded governorship election in Anambra State presents us with a few notable lessons in this era of change, and the generally acknowledged successful conduct of the election should not prevent us from appreciating the lessons.
First, consistent with the change mantra of the ruling party, there is a new reality of change in electoral politics. The second item on the highlights of APC’s 2015 election manifesto, next to the party’s promise to devolve power to states, is the strengthening of INEC to “reduce/eliminate electoral malpractices.” Many would have cynically brushed off this promise as another political gimmick. They would be wrong. For, there is a clearly observable presidential leadership of a new attitude to the conduct of free and fair elections. We must applaud the approach.
The explanation for this attitude is not far-fetched. The president’s party has not shied away from trumpeting the integrity of the Commander-in-Chief as the Protagonist-in-Chief for electoral integrity. There is some substance in these cheer-leading efforts for Mr. President. Look at the success rate of APC, the ruling party, in the special and bye elections since 2015, and you will agree that the president has not considered those elections as a “do or die” battle, unlike at least one of his predecessors.
Another explanation is, however, available. President Buhari himself was a three-time victim of what he and his supporters believed to be electoral malfeasance on the part of PDP, the then ruling party. In at least one instance, the PDP winner of the presidential election all but conceded the charge of rigging with his subsequent setting up of an electoral integrity committee from which nothing came out. It was partly because of this experience of impunity that ACN, one of the legacy parties that formed the APC, made electoral integrity its major assignment post-2007.
His experience as a victim of electoral malpractice must have sensitized President Buhari to the need for true independence for INEC, the electoral umpire. Did the president give INEC a marching order to ensure perceptible fairness in its work? If he did not explicitly, his body language must have spoken volumes. While it is what we must expect in a decent society, we cannot quickly forget the impunity of the recent past. We must appreciate and commend the efforts to reorient the nation in a positive direction.
Second, we may, with good reason, affirm that the incumbency factor is a big deal and it worked in favor of Governor Obiano. The impact of four years on the seat is not to be taken lightly. Of course, four years without performance won’t really matter and may have backfired against him. That the Anambra electorates saw him fit for re-election is a credit on the part of the governor. Furthermore, it is significant that Peter Obi’s abandonment of his former protege did not affect the electoral fortunes of the governor. These are interesting times.
In one sense, it appears clear that without his name on the ballot, Obi was one of the greatest losers of the election. He campaigned intensely against Obiano and for Obaze. Anambra voters refused his entreaties and voted to reelect their governor. Two reasons may be adduced here. First, Anambrans may be nursing a grudge against Obi for jumping the ship of Nkemba’s APGA, the party that gave him a shot at fame for two terms as governor of the state. Second, PDP, his new-found love, has nothing to offer the people of Anambra at a time that it is also struggling to survive as a party. So much for mainstream politics.
Third, while we may not fully understand what their motivations are, we can agree that the electorates are in control. Whatever reason they have for backing Obiano, it seems clear that the electorates are in charge as they should be. Sure, there are complaints of money changing hands. If it is true, it is a sad reflection of the reality of our poverty-driven politics. But if only money from candidate to voters played a role in Obiano’s victory, it still shows that we have moved from the fraudulent and undemocratic use of security agencies to rig elections and thwart the preference of the voters.
My conclusion in the last paragraph is not in any way a support for the ugly influence of money in politics. There is still a crying need for the education of the electorate. They ought to know that voting for a crook who offered them one thousand naira amounts to selling their political birthright for a plate of porridge. But if they opened their eyes wide and have their senses operating optimally, and they still prefer a rogue with billions to spread around, then they are surely going to pay for it with their forsaken welfare. Abe Lincoln was right: “Elections belong to the people. It’s their decision. If they decide to turn their back on the fire and burn their behinds, then they will just have to sit on their blisters.”
The fact remains, however, that APGA’s Obiano won and APC’s Nwoye lost. It is a stretch to attribute this to the influence of money. If it were true that money played a lot of influence, we should expect that the candidate of the ruling party would have more access to free-flowing money as it used to be. It is too soon to forget, in view of the ongoing investigation and litigation, that a former ruling party all but emptied the treasury and bank vaults in its bid to attract votes and remain in power.
Fourth, in all of this, we cannot but recognize an ominous note of warning to the ruling party. After the 2015 presidential elections, I expressed delight and hope that the country was getting into an era of a strong two-party system in which electorates have a choice between two competing ideological platforms. The results of the elections since 2015 do not clearly show that we are there. However, the fact that the ruling party has lost elections in areas where it performed well in 2015, including the Southwest, suggests either that the voters are not wholly satisfied with its performance or that the ruling party has some internal issues to resolve. Either way, the party’s performance in special and bye-elections thus far calls for soul searching if it is not going to be embarrassed in 2019.
In the case of Anambra elections, Governor Okorocha, who as the Chairman of the Progressive Governors Forum is well-placed to know what the challenges are, offered his advice to the ruling party to get its house in order. In his congratulatory message to Obiano, Okorocha advised other candidates to accept the results of the election and suggested that in-fighting within the camp of APC may have cost the party the election.
Finally, it appears to me that the most important political takeaway from the election is the collapse of IPOB’s threat. The large turnout of voters in the urban and rural areas of the state was a huge morale booster for the political leaders of the Southeast zone who had placed their political capital on the line, canvassing for Ndigbo’s mass participation in the election against the demand of IPOB for total boycott. Between those establishment leaders and IPOB leaders, the people’s choice was clear on election day.
The huge turnout for the election was also a lesson for the central government to manage crisis effectively without overreaction to raucous agitation led by itinerant leaders. Surely, Ndigbo, like other nationalities, have genuine grievances against the system, and it is in the interest of the Federal Government to take seriously these complaints with a view to resolving them.
President Buhari did the right thing by visiting the Southeast shortly before Anambra governorship election and reassuring them of the readiness of the Federal Government to work with the zone on the issues of concern to them. But what just happened with the turnout suggests powerfully that the Igbo are as desirous as other nationalities to resolve issues politically and within the territorial boundaries of Nigeria.
