THE IMPACT OF CREDIBLE ELECTORAL PROCESS ON ACCOUNTABILITY AT THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT LEVEL

THE IMPACT OF CREDIBLE ELECTORAL PROCESS ON ACCOUNTABILITY AT THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT LEVEL

(A CASE STUDY OF DEKINA LOCAL GOVERNMENT COUNCIL)

ABSTRACT

To ensure accountability at the Local Government Level, there must be credible election and the electoral processes has to be free and fair. For any election to be fair, transparent and credible there is need for accountability and electoral integrity on the part of the body charged with the responsibility of conducting the elections. The independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is charged with that responsibility in Nigeria. Our binocular was therefore focused on the impact of credible electoral process on accountability at the local government level. The survey carried out shared that ‘INEC’ has failed the nation in the previous elections conducted in this country, evidenced with protests and violence over the allegations of election rigging, irregularities and wanton disrespect for our electoral law. But ‘INEC’ recorded a huge success in the April 2011 general elections which was judged the most credible by Nigerians and the local and international observers. It is recommended that the way forward should be positive change of heart and attitude on the part of INEC officials and politicians to ensure impartiality in the conduct of elections and complete adherence to electoral Law. None compliance with the electoral laws will definitely make our democracy a mockery and there is urgent need for accountability at the Local Government Council through credible electoral process in our political system to ensure peace and rapid economic and political development in Dekina Local Government Council.

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1     BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Nigeria is said to have crossed the magical threshold of democratic dispensation. This is because Nigeria has witnessed about four democratic elections plus two civilian-to-civilian handover. But the question to ask ourselves at this juncture is, how has Nigeria been fair in the electoral process in bringing creditability on accountability in the democratic processes in Nigeria and Dekina Local Government in particular.

Nigeria first match towards democratic principles under Local Luggard, the first Governor General of Nigeria. It was consolidated by Sir Hugh Clifford in 1922 who was Luggard’s successor. He set up the Nigeria Legislative Council which unofficial members representing the municipalities of Lagos and Calabar Ogoja (1981:9). He was the first to introduce elective principle in Nigeria. The high point of Nigeria’s democratic experience commenced under Sir Author Richards who succeed Sir Bernard Bourdillon introduced the Richard constitutional democracy and democratic electoral processes. The Richard’s constitution was inaugurated in 1945 after the formation of the first political party in Nigeria in 1944, that is, the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroon (NCNC).

The Macpheson constitution of 1951 according to Ejiofor, placed Lagos under the authority of the Western Regions and provided for direct election into the three regional houses which in turn elected the members of the central legislature.

Thus, the regional representation was on a multi-member constituency pattern, the affermath of his electoral arrangement was that, it pave the way for expressing tribal differences and tribal hatred. It marked the history and genesis of tribal and ethnic politics in Nigeria, it gave rise to tribal parties such as National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroon (NCNC) in the East, the Action Group (AG) in the West and the Northern people’s congress (NPC) in the North.

Richard and Mcpherson’s constitution introduced a quasi-federal structure and regionalization of the country and the competitive demand by the North and West in the Federal Legislature. This had implications for resources control and population figures Onyeka (2002).

The question of who gets what, when and how became a serious matter, up till date electoral fraud arises from the desire to control resources at the local, state and federal levels of government. In effects, the incidence of manipulation of census figures, rigging of election, siphoning of public funds and other anti-social activities associated with Nigeria’s electoral processes were borne out of the desire to have access and control over national resources.

This notwithstanding, records have it that the 1959 elections ended on a conclusive note because it was the elections that proceeded independence and as such supervised by the British and the colonial power.

The 1964 General elections stimulated electoral crisis, which couple with the earlier -1962-63 census crisis, to breed the colouration of the electoral process. The crisis led to series of alliances among parties and the quest for resources control at the federal level, the elections were in undated with all sorts of frauds, abuses, and malpractices including thuggery, violence and other forms of intimidatory instruments, Onyeka (2002) records that houses and cars of opponents were set on fire, law enforcement agencies were equally to intimidate opponents.

According to Onyeka (2002), the 1979 elections were fairly smoother than those of 1964.

The elections were keenly contested by the five registered political parties namely.

The Nigerian peoples’ Party (NPP), the National Party of Nigeria (NPN), The Great Nigeria Peoples Party (GNPP). The people’s Redemption Party (PRP), and the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPNs). Though the election also recorded some basic malpractices for which Nigerian elections were known rigging, thuggery and violence. Youths and university students were adequately mobilized for thuggery and hooliganism. The greatest bone of contention in the 1979 general election was the interpretation of the 2/3^rd of 19 states. This marked the beginning of court major intervention in electoral processes to ensure credible elections in Nigeria.

During the 1983 elections, changes of electoral fraud were replete and pervasive. In Anambra State the elections were massively rigged in favour of the National Party of Nigeria (NPN) candidate, lots of litigations and violence ensued. In Ondo State, the result of the gubernatorial election initially declared in favour of the National Party of Nigeria (NPN) was reversed and delivered in favour of the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) candidate. The federal electoral commission (FEDECO) was indicted by the commission of inquiry headed by Babalakin, which led to its dissolution, while National electoral commission (NEC) came on board.

The election that came up between 1989-1993 were adjudged the best in the history of elections in Nigeria. The open-secrete voting was aimed at checking the incessant incidence of rigging and other forms of electoral malpractices. Thus, the presidential election of June 12, 1993 under which chief MKO Abiola was elected was seen as the neatest election ever held in Nigeria but on June 23, 1993, General Ibrahim Babngida cancilled the election outrightly.

Abacha’s transition programme kicked off in march 1996 with non-party local government election to select councilors and council chairman through an electoral college. A second election scheduled for December on party basis was put off. Only five of the thirty (30) associations that applied were registered. The three most viable associations that ought to be registered, the all Nigeria Congress, the socialist people’s parties and schemingly put off by NECON.

The registered political parties were, the United Nigeria Congress Party (UNCP), Democratic Party of Nigeria (DPN), National Congress Party of Nigeria (NCPN), and the Grassroots Democratic Movement (GDM). These were seen as parties set up mechanically to declare General Abacha a consensus candidate. Following the sudden demise of Abacha in 1998, the succeeding Head of State General Abdulsalami Abubakar set in motion an immediate time table for civil democratic government in Nigeria.

The election was held in 1999 which brought in Chief Olusegun Obasanjo as the elected civilian president. Three parties stood for the elections, people’s Democratic party (PDP), All People’s Party (APP), and Alliance for Democracy (AD) but PDP was the anointed Party. Many forms of abuses and malpractices were committed in the 1999 General elections.

The electoral fraud and crisis in the 12003-2004 elections commenced with the desired ambition of the vast majority of the office holders within the legislature at the federal and state levels to get a second term at all cost. This desperate situation according to the Transition Monitoring Group (TMG) report, resulted in heating up of all political processes. Political office holders most especially the Governors utilized their power of incumbency to intimidate their opponents.

The political associations had to fight their way through the judiciary processes before securing registration.

The 2007 general elections were said to be the worst election Nigeria ever had. The number one citizen, that is, the president was quoted that “the election is a do-or-die affair for PDP”. There was massive rigging, multiple voting, impersonation and prevention of qualified/eligible voters from voting during election. Election did not hold in some places like Anambra State during the gubernatorial elections. For some places, it started as late as 6:00pm when it ought to have ended at 3:00pm. Thousands of Nigerians were disenfranchised due to non-issuance of voter’s cards while the elections were still in progress, congratulatory message were broadcasted on air by the ruling party (PDP).

As a result, coalition of parties met in many states to reject the result as presented by INEC.

Generally, from the inception of democratic experience in Nigeria to the present date, electoral process has been marred by fraud. This has led to the judiciary been the last hope for the aggrieved parties to seek redress. Right from 1998-1999 general elections, the aftermath of election is setting up of election petition tribunals of various levels of government.

          

The April 2011 General election which produced Dr. Goodluck Ebere Jonathan as the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is said to be the best election so far in the history of Nigeria democracy. The 2011 general elections was properly monitored by both local and international communities and was said to be free and fair because it has been the best general election so far. The election was conducted through credible electoral processes and the general public believes that there will be proper accountability both in the federal, states and local government areas.

Therefore, every electoral process expected to be credible, free and fair and make meaningful impact in the various levels of government.

1.2     STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The electoral process in Nigeria has been faced with several obstacles. These problems includes: power of incumbency, wide spread rigging, stolen mandate, dependency of electoral commission, electoral violence, stealing of ballot boxes and post election violence in some parts of the country, just like in the last April 2011 general elections etc.

Iyajis (2003) lamented the crude manner in which irregularities were perpetrated. He averred that, the mandate of the people were stolen in a manner reminiscent of one-stone age policies where the size of the foot of the master determined the length of a foot. Rigging has become the order of the day, transparency thrown overboard, and the necessary questions to ask at this juncture are, how do we re-establish the credibility of the electoral process in Nigeria? What are the roles of Independent National Electoral Commission? How do we eliminate or reduce electoral fraud and lastly what are the roles of civil society organizations in the promotion and protection of Nigerian nascent Democracy?

1.3     OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The main objective of the study is to critically assess, evaluate and analyze the impact of credible electoral processes on accountability at the local government level. Specifically, the research work has the following objectives:

1. To identify the impacts of credible electoral process in Dekina Local Government Area.
2. To identify the problems of credible electoral process in Nigeria.
3. To examine the impacts of election nullification on democratization process in Nigeria.
4. To identify the impediments to free and fair elections in Nigeria
5. To make some policy, recommendations toward sustainable credible electoral processes in Nigeria.

1.4     SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this work is to assess the impact of credible electoral process on accountability at the local government level and suggest possible ways of strengthening the electoral process in Nigeria Democracy.

This will go a long way to curb election malpractices, help build confidence and encourage Nigerians for more participation in political process.

This research work is also expected to be a resource material for both students and scholars who wish to research on the topic.

The impact of credible electoral process on accountability at the local government level.

1.5     RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The following questions were formulated for this project work:

1. Has lack of adequate control measure responsible for election malpractices in Dekina Local Government.
2. Has the use of Direct data capturing machine improved the electoral process.
3. Is there any meaningful development taking place so far in the electoral processes since the change of Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) chairman.
4. How credible and accountable was the just concluded April 2011 general election.
5. Has the Independence of INEC brought credible electoral process on accountability in the electoral procedures.

1.6     DEFINITION OF TERMS

ELECTION: This represents a modern and universally accepted process through which individuals elect those to represent them in government.

CREDIBILITY: This is used to show that an election is free and fair.

THUGGERY: This means violent, usually criminal behaviour in part of the people.

ACCOUNTABILITY: This is used to ensure that proper account is given during nor after the election.

 
DEMOCRACY: Joseph Schumpeter defines it as an institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions in which individuals acquire the power to decide by means of a competitive struggle for people’s vote.