Elections are about the most complex and intricately woven multi-faceted but concerted venture that could be undertaken by highly fallible humans. What people get to see as polling day proceedings are a tidy convergence of multiple strands of assignments that had been worked into a schedule motif by sundry players in the poll project – most especially the election management body, which is the lead player and anchor of the project. When any single strand of those lines of responsibilities falls short on expectation, however, the election project gets endangered to the extent of the centrality of that particular activity to the whole project.
This scenario is all the more complicated in our clime where elections are like an all-out war that takes no hostages. Owing to avowed security dictates, scheduled days of election are effectively ‘paralysis days’ as pertains to all other human engagements. In other words, no other serious activity ever gets fixed for days that Nigerian elections are billed to hold.
Besides, our laws prescribe eligibility for voting only in specific polling units where people got registered for the civic duty. Hence, people who for whatever reason got registered outside where they are normally resident must travel back ahead of polling days if they desire to exercise their franchise. Because schools and other public places are used for polling activities, these establishments are also sent on ad hoc holidays ahead of the polling day. And so, when there is a sudden shift in those scheduled dates, there is profound paralysis and waste in quantitative as well as qualitative terms for all stakeholders in the election project.
It was no less the effect last Saturday when the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), at the last minute, pulled by a week elections that it had fixed for a few hours hence. The national (i.e. Presidential and National Assembly) elections was moved from 16th February to 23rd February, and proportionately the state (i.e. Governorship and State Houses of Assembly) as well as Federal Capital Territory council polls that were earlier slated for 2nd March got shifted to 9th March. In calling that postponement, the electoral commission cited “a careful review of the implementation of its logistics and operational plan, and the determination to conduct free, fair, and credible elections,” which led it to “the conclusion that proceeding with the elections as scheduled is no longer feasible.” It stated that the postponement, however, “will afford the commission the opportunity to address identified challenges in order to maintain the quality of our elections.”
Nigerians were in rare unison outraged over that call by the electoral commission – and justifiably so. So much had been invested in time and materials by stakeholders to make ready for participation in the poll, especially the national elections widely projected as crucial to future of this country. Businesses had in advance called off their operations for Saturday, and not a few had before that day travelled out to their voting bases – outside of their normal ports of residence. Foreign observers had arrived in the country, and along with domestic counterparts had deployed to locations where they purposed to play their intended role. Security personnel for the election had fanned out to grassroots locations, only a short stop from polling units where they were to report early on election day. INEC itself had for most part deployed ad hoc personnel and materials – sensitive and insensitive – to registration area camps, which are the ward level stopover points from where they mobilise at dawn on election day to polling units. That, of course, isn’t mentioning the global attention on the country occasioned by the proposed poll.
Under such circumstance, the challenges sufficient to warrant the electoral body throwing in the spanners at the last minute must have been profoundly threatening to the success of the poll. What many, from the reactions, found more exasperating was that the commission didn’t come to a realisation of its unreadiness until so close to when polling units were billed to open for the national elections.
There is no plausible explanation for institutional failings that necessitate shifting long-projected election schedules at the last minute, with the huge losses in invested costs for all stakeholders involved. But I was present where similar harsh reality faced the commission in the past, and I know how profoundly reluctantly such a decision crystalises. It is typically a last ditch trade-off to safeguard the impending poll against gross integrity deficiency. With the unpalatable reality on hand, the next focus for all should be to rally in remedying the threats to poll integrity.
Last Saturday’s poll postponement was much like the poll shift compelled by logistical challenges that confronted the former electoral commission led by Professor Attahiru Jega in 2011; and that indeed is more so than the six-week shift dictated by security warrant in 2015 to which this latest incident was widely likened in reports at the weekend. In the 2011 instance, the NASS elections were originally fixed for 02nd April, the Presidential poll for 09th April and the Governorship and State Assembly poll for 16th April. But the NASS poll had to be stepped down mid-stream on 02nd April and deferred by a week, which then necessitated proportional shifts in the other two elections.
The postponement in 2011 was necessitated by a supplier’s failure to deliver security-coded result sheets on schedule. The Jega-led commission, which was relatively new in office at that time, had introduced many reforms to thwart historical abuses of our electoral process by political gladiators. One of those reforms was the customisation of result sheets to polling centres, such that extraneous result sheets could no longer be imported to polling units to declare fake results, as was the case until then. The commission at the time would not compromise on this reform, and when a supplier did not deliver some consignments of the result sheets up till the last minute, it pulled the breaks on the poll and eventually rescheduled by a week. But it compensated for that tough call by turning the tide of the historical rot in the Nigerian electoral process.
The present commission led by Professor Mahmood Yakubu cited failings in the “implementation of (INEC’s) logistics and operational plan” in postponing the election last Saturday. The electoral body didn’t make the call earlier, perhaps, because conducting elections is like steering a speed train: the momentum begins sluggishly and builds up gradually until it hits cruising speed. When in full throttle, it would be irresponsible to eagerly apply the brakes unless the driver loses the last shred of hope for manoeuvring. It was the loss of manoeuvring room that the commission apparently faced up to when it pulled the brakes at dawn on Saturday.
But INEC now has the historical burden to compensate for that grim recourse; and it could well begin with being more forthcoming with stakeholders on its challenges. For instance, the commission until lately gave repeated assurances of high percentile compliance with its logistical and operational designs. The sudden postponement of poll last Saturday, unfortunately, did not bear out those assurances. Even then, the desperation that characterises our electoral environment isn’t much help, because recent incidents of random incineration of electoral materials in some INEC offices across the country may have contributed to undermining the operational readiness of the electoral body. Still, the commission will need to identify defaulting role players within and outside its fold for due penalty over the schedule fiasco.
The redeeming factor in this whole challenge will be INEC delivering resoundingly successful elections on the new dates that have been scheduled. That is some bright spot for all to look forward to.
Please join me on kayodeidowu.blogspot.be for conversation.
