The change of leadership at the centre, achieved at the last elections, resulted mostly from a combination of factors, including a vigilant citizenry driven by Civil Society Organisations (CSOs). ERIC IKHILAE examines the role played by one of such groups – Nigeria Civil Society Situation Room.
Nigeria has been hailed globally for achieving a rancour-free change of leadership at the centre, with the displacement of the ruling party – the Peoples Democratic Party – through a near-perfect electoral process, which many have described as a work-in-progress.
The success achieved in the general elections has been attributed to a combination of factors, which included the existence of an electoral umpire with a focused leadership, a well-coordinated opposition forces and a vigilant citizenry, driven by observant civil society organisations (CSOs).
One of such CSOs is the Nigeria Civil Society Situation Room (Situation Room), a coalition of about 60 CSOs, which kept an eye on processes leading to the elections.
Led by the Executive Director of the Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre (PLAC), Clement Nwankwo, the group’s members monitored the electoral process, keeping Nigerians informed about developments through briefings at its situation room in Abuja.
In the build-up to the elections, it held discussions with major key players in the electoral process, including the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Attahiru Jega; international figures, such as the ex-Secretary-General, United Nations, Kofi Annan, and notable religious leaders, such as Cardinal John Onaiyekan.
Some of the sessions examined issues, including INEC’s preparations for the elections, how to ensure a rancour-free process and what should be done to ensure that the nation gets the electoral process right and avert chaos.
When the elections were suddenly postponed from the earlier dates of February 14 and 28, the group alerted the populace, through a statement on February 12, titled: “Situation Room: Nigeria’s democracy imperiled,” to an imminent danger.
It urged major stakeholders, particularly the courts, the security agencies and religious organisations to be wary and desist from yielding themselves as tools to truncate the democratic process.
It noted: “the postponement of the elections following the stark refusal of the military authorities to guarantee security for the elections, while evoking dark memories of past military dictatorships, has thrown up various constitutional and political challenges that undermine and subvert our fledgling democracy.
“It has also shaken public credibility and confidence in the forthcoming elections, setting off a round of speculations and conspiracy theories about the real motivation for the shift of the election dates,” it said, warning against any further tinkering with the election timetable.
“We believe the postponement of this election, for whatever reason, will undermine whatever modicum of legitimacy the electoral process still has and may ultimately be the trigger for massive unrest, violence and armed conflict, effectively setting the stage for civil unrest,” it added.
At the conclusion of the first round of voting on March 28 the group, after a thorough assessment of the exercise, observed some lapses, including late arrival of electoral officers to polling centres, reported cases of the malfunctioning of the card reader machines, partisan conduct by some security personnel, among others.
In a statement it issued on March 29, the group stated that the failure of the card reader in some cases, which forced INEC to revert to manual accreditation, undermined the full benefit anticipated by the use of biometric technology and imposed unnecessary hardship on Nigerians.
It also warned about the threat posed to the process’s credibility, where security agencies failed to prevent interference in the electoral process in some states. It urged the security agencies and officials to conduct themselves according to established standards of professional conduct, and asked INEC to correct its own deficiencies and inform the Nigerian public as to what to expect,” during the next round of elections.
On April 13, the group made public its assessment of the April 11 governorship and House of Assembly elections, querying the credibility of the outcome of the elections in Rivers, Akwa Ibom and Abia states.
The group, whose member organisations had election monitors throughout the country, said from reports submitted by members, it was concerned “about the overall conduct of the elections” in the three states because there are grounds to question the credibility of the elections results.
It urged INEC to take steps to authenticate the final collated results from the three states against the polling unit results and make a reasoned judgment about them.
The group noted that in Rivers, “historically deep-rooted political animosities played out in a brazen, violent and naked manner to subvert the electoral process in many local governments in the state.
“In Akwa Ibom, there were also serious questions about the veracity of the results because of reports of active and direct partisan interference with elections.
“There are also concerns about Abia State, which recorded multiple cases of electoral misconduct,” it said.
The group expressed concern about what it termed the weak oversight powers of INEC’s national headquarters over the Resident Electoral Commissioners and state INEC offices in the management and conduct of elections, which it partly blamed for the situation in the three states.
“This makes it easy for compromised RECs and other state-level INEC officers to undermine the credibility of the election, sometimes with reckless impunity,” it said.
Nwankwo dwelt on this perceived inadequacy in the administrative arrangement of INEC when he spoke with The Nation in Abuja. He stressed the urgent need for amendments to electoral law, to improve on the level of control INEC headquarters should have over the conduct of its officials at the state level.
“That is the problem. There is a vacuum in the law that provides a hiding place for INEC headquarters to hide and refuse to cancel elections.
“The electoral law requires that INEC makes available all the needed evidences, if it gets to litigation. Should that be the case, as INEC has said it will not cancel announced elections, I think it becomes important that INEC provides all the necessary evidences needed to prosecute litigation should the aggrieved elect to explore the litigation option.”
On his assessment of this year’s elections, Nwankwo said “the 2015 general elections have seen a huge improvement on the part of INEC. We are not there yet. We think it is a long way to go and that there are improvements to be made. I am sure there will be recommendations on how to further improve the electoral system that need to be embarked upon.”
He said the Nigeria Civil Society Situation Room has been in existence since 2010 and that it also observed the elections in 2011. “We think it (the Situation Room) has provided a good platform and mechanism for civil society organisations to closely follow the electoral process, observe it and make recommendations for improvement.
“So, by and large, yes, we are doing well in fulfilling the purpose for which this platform was created.”
On the group’s future engagements, Nwankwo said “We will do a review of this year’s elections. We will come up with suggestions on improvement, and advocate these suggestions. We will also function in the manner of watching over the governance process.
“So, it is not just about elections, it is about the performance of government, the delivery of government and the monitoring of all the indicators of governance to ensure that the government fulfils the promises it has made to Nigerians.”
