A STUDY OF THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE 2018 INCONCLUSIVE ELECTION IN OSUN STATE ON ELECTORAL PROCESS IN NIGERIA

A STUDY OF THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE 2018 INCONCLUSIVE ELECTION IN OSUN STATE ON ELECTORAL PROCESS IN NIGERIA

Background to the study

It is imperative to underscore the fact that the recurring issue of inconclusive election is becoming frequent ubiquitous in the conduct of elections in Nigeria and, a formidable challenge in Nigeria’s electoral system, this therefore lends this subject as particularly fertile for exploration, within the context of the programme. The rationale for choosing Osun State as a case study for analysis and to interrogate the concept in Osun are several, first, Osun offers the index and only case of inconclusive election in the South- West geopolitical zone of the country till date. Second, the election was an off-cycle one, outside the general elections calendar, one would have expected that the Electoral Management Body (EMB), the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to mobilise every resource to prepare seriously and comprehensively to forestall any electoral, logistical and security lapses that could have elicited a situation warranting a supplementary election. Yet, the unexpected happened and there was a re-run election to the chagrin of perceptive members of the public, with its concomitant consequences. Third, it was an election that took place before the 2019 general elections in Nigeria, therefore, it would have been expected also that the electoral umpire would seize the opportunity to test the waters and make adequate preparations, while eliminating observable lapses but again, incidences of inconclusive election in the 2019 general election is the highest in the history of elections conducted in Nigeria.

Inconclusive election is a recent but recurring development in Nigeria’s electoral history and process. The issue of inconclusive elections has provoked so much debate in the public space and this reinforces the importance of elections to democracy. The electorate hold on tenaciously to the fact that they have the power and the right to elect those who will preside over their affairs, hence, they do not just want to vote but they want their votes to count. It is in this regard that Joseph (1987) argued that elections do not necessarily guarantee worthwhile democratic rule, it is also true that election is at the heart of the modern conception of democracy following from the inability of the modern society to accommodate the classical democratic notion of involving every citizen in decision- making. In a related vein, Akhter (2001) postulated that the abuse and misuse of elections and the manipulation of the electoral system notwithstanding, elections are still relied upon for determining important matters in most political systems. For example, elections demonstrate that legitimate political power flows from below. Free and fair elections, acceptable elections devoid of irregularities and malpractices are essential for the sustainability of democracy. And the conditions of free and fair elections include the right to vote by the entire adult population; regularity of elections within the context of constitutionally open contestation for legislative seats, campaigning free from intimidation and violence, secret balloting without influence and honest counting and reporting of election results.

In spite of the fact that inconclusive election is well provided for in the Electoral Act 2010 as well as Independent Nigeria Electoral Commission (INEC) Guidelines and Regulations, many of the political gladiators see inconclusive election as a clever and deceptive way of manipulating the electoral process to favour a particular political party. That is why the former speaker of the House of Representatives Dogara. Y. (2019) warned the “Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) against setting a dangerous precedence by declaring elections inconclusive. In 2019, INEC had declared elections inconclusive in at least six states, including Bauchi where the former speaker hails from. Addressing a national executive council meeting of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) in Abuja, Dogara cited election cases in Ghana and other African countries, saying, it is only in Nigeria that elections are declared inconclusive. It will be very, very unfortunate that INEC, which is led by a first class professor of history, will set this dangerous and unacceptable precedence in our political history. What has happened is pure evil”. Unini Chioma 2019 pointed that “…The fundamental question that arises here is whether INEC is telling the whole world that an election cannot be won by just one vote in a democratic setting. How then did we come about this idea of ‘margin of votes between two leading candidates’, that we can no longer conclude our elections?

…For instance, in the bye-election to fill the vacant seat of Lokoja/Kogi Federal Constituency last year, triggered by the death of Hon. Buba Jibrin, Haruna Isah was declared winner having polled 26,860 votes as against Engr. Bashir Abubakar of PDP, who scored 14,845 votes. The margin of win was 6,900 votes. The election was marred with violence such that 19,960 votes were canceled. INEC did not declare the election inconclusive, but proceeded to declare APC’s candidate winner. That is the level of arbitrariness and selectiveness of INEC in the application of the unknown principle. Consider also the election for the Abia North senatorial district which, by INEC standard, should have been declared inconclusive. But, Orji Uzor Kalu, a former governor of Abia State, was among the about 100 senators-elect who received their certificates of return from INEC in Abuja. He had been returned as elected after polling 31,201 votes for the APC to beat incumbent PDP senator, Mao Ohuabunwa who polled 20,801. Some 38,526 votes were canceled, which is much larger than the margin of win of 10,400 votes. INEC refused to declare the Abia North senatorial election as inconclusive” (The   Nigeria Lawyer 2019).

In the same token, Taiwo Adisa writing in the Nigeria Tribune Newspaper (2019) argued about the discrepancies in the different provisions of the law about inconclusive election as well as the differences in the application of the provisions and remarked thus, “Section 133 of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria states that “A candidate for an election to the office of President shall be deemed to have been duly elected to such office where, being the only candidate nominated for the election – (a) he has a majority of YES votes over NO votes cast at the election; and (b) he has not less than one-quarter of the votes cast at the election in each of at least two-thirds of all the States in the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja.” Section 134 (1): states that “A candidate for an election to the office of President shall be deemed to have been duly elected, where, there being only two candidates for the election – (a) he has the majority of votes cast at the election; and (b) he has not less than one-quarter of the votes cast at the election in each of at least two-thirds of all the States in the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. (2) A candidate for an election to the office of President shall be deemed to have been duly elected where, there being more than two candidates for the election- (a) he has the highest number of votes cast at the election; and (b) he has not less than one-quarter of the votes cast at the election in each of at least two-thirds of all the states in the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja.”

Section 179 states thus: 179. (1) “A candidate for an election to the office of Governor of a State shall be deemed to have been duly elected to such office where, being the only candidate nominated for the election-(a) he has a majority of YES votes over NO votes cast at the election; and (b) he has not less than one-quarter of the votes cast at the election in each of at least two-thirds of all the local government areas in the State, but where the only candidate fails to be elected in accordance with this subsection, then there shall be fresh nominations.

(2) A candidate for an election to the office of Governor of a State shall be deemed to have been duly elected where, there being two or more candidates- (a) he has the highest number of votes cast at the election; and (b) he has not less than one-quarter of all the votes cast in each of at least two-thirds of all the local government areas in the state.” Besides the constitutional provisions, Section 53(1 and 2) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) as well as Section 69 of the Act provide for conditions whereby votes can be voided. Section 53 of the Electoral Act recognises over-voting as a condition where votes of the affected polling unit can be voided.

Section 69 of the Electoral Act indicates that: “In an election to the office of the President or Governor whether or not contested and in any contested election to any other elective office, the result shall be ascertained by counting the votes cast for each candidate and subject to the provisions of sections 133, 134 and 179 of the constitution, the candidate that receives the highest number of votes shall be declared elected by the appropriate Returning Officer.”

But INEC is hanging on to provisions of the Electoral Act 2010 at Section 53(2) which states that: “Where votes cast at an election in any polling unit exceed the number of registered voters in that polling unit, the result of the election for that polling unit shall be declared null and void by the commission and another election may be conducted at a date to be fixed by the commission where the result at that polling unit may affect the overall result in the constituency.”

…..Unfortunately, INEC has been unable to justify the refusal to apply the inconclusive appellation to some elections and why the logic is only applied haphazardly. For instance, critics of the commission had raised issues as to why the governorship election in Ogun and Kaduna states were not declared inconclusive, especially when the results declared fell within the “margin of win” description.

To this end, this research will endeavour to delve into how elections should be properly conducted, and will be generally acceptable to the mass of the electorate. How important or otherwise is inconclusive election to the overall outcome of elections and how will inconclusive election help to bring about integrity of the electoral process or is inconclusive election a fraud that should be jettisoned? Or is it a genuine attempt to make elections freer, fairer, more transparent and generally acceptable? What was at the back of the mind of the framers of the law when they input “margin of election” into the Electoral Act? What are the pros and the cons of inconclusive elections that need to be vigorously interrogated? In what ways can inconclusive elections contribute to the integrity of the electoral process? Or should it be expunged from Electoral Acts.

 

Statement of Research Problem

The problems associated with inconclusive elections are enormous ranging from financial burden, security, legitimacy, democratic erosion, awareness and mass education. The centrality of elections in a democratic polity cannot be overemphasized. Momoh and Adejumobi (1999) underscored this fact very poignantly thus, “Elections occupy a central place in the democratic process through the animating force they provide for representative government. On the other hand, they serve as an instrument of legitimization for the state and who manage the reins of state power, while on the other, they ensure political accountability to the people”. Relatedly, Mackenzie (1954) summed up that elections can only be free and fair in an environment where there exists: “(a) an independent judiciary to interpret electoral law; (b) an honest, competent, non-partisan administration to run elections; (c) a developed system of political parties, well organised to put their policies, traditions and teams of candidates before the electors as alternatives between which to choose and (d) a general acceptance throughout the political community of certain rather than vague rules of the game which limits the struggle for power because of some unspoken sentiments that if the rules are not observed more or less faithfully, the game itself will disappear”.

The question therefore is that in what ways does inconclusive election promote or undermine the ingredients of free and fair elections that have been pointed out above? It would be recalled that incidences of inconclusive election has been on the ascendency in recent elections conducted in the country. Not only does inconclusive election bring about pent-up anger, latent animosities, concealed hostility and mutual suspicion but it also heightens tension, creates anxiety and conceivably circumstances for people to call to question the integrity, sanctity and credibility of the electoral body.

Critical to the issue of election is the role of Electoral Management Bodies (EMB’s), in this case INEC and political parties. If the EMB is independent, impartial and competent, it will reflect on the outcome of elections. Similarly, if the political parties play by the rules and do not engage in any untoward practices, there is every likelihood that the outcome of elections will not generate controversies or cause anxiety of any sort. It is, therefore, incumbent on both the INEC and political parties as important stakeholders to play their roles diligently to have decent and reliable outcomes.

Consequently, in the case of the 2018 gubernatorial election in Osun State, the inconclusive election according the electoral umpire was predicated on the "Margin of Lead Principle" contained in paragraph 41(e) and 43(b) of the INEC Regulations and Guidelines, the commission cannot declare a winner if the number of canceled votes can mathematically affect the outcome of the election.

So, for instance, if the margin of victory between the first-placed candidate and the second-placed candidate is 100, the number of canceled votes cannot be any more than 99. If the number of canceled votes is 101, or higher, then the result of the declared election will have to be declared inconclusive since the second-placed candidate can mathematically win the election if all 101 voters cast their votes for just that candidate.

Therefore, to what extent are INEC and the political parties playing the role expected of them to guarantee peaceful elections? Are acrimonious and contentious election outcomes a reflection of abdication of responsibilities by these important and critical stakeholders in the electoral process? As a student of Election and Party Politics, the author regards this problem an important practical phenomenon because it affects the state’s overall development. Elections are a means of putting in place a state’s political leadership to preside over its economic, political and social affairs. Therefore, if the process of doing so is corrupt or questionable then the quality of leadership becomes compromised and tends to engender the development of underdevelopment. Otherwise electoral legitimacy will be weak or lost and can further undermine the tenets of purpose- driven leadership and good governance where fair elections are an integral part of the democratization process.

BUY THIS TOPIC ON WHATSAPP

Related Project Materials

Abstract

This research work examined and compares the physicochemical properties and some chemical cons...

ABSTRACT

This study was carried out to examine the the role of external auditors on financial accou...