Buhari’s promise of credible electoral system: How far?

In this report, KUNLE ODEREMI and WALE AKINSELURE write on the suspense that greeted the Electoral Act amendment against the backdrop of the promise by President Muhammadu Buhari to leave behind a credible electoral system.

END to the uncertainty in the posture of President Muhammadu Buhari towards the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill, 2021 came in a letter written to the National Assembly and read by Senate President, Ahmad Lawan, at Tuesday’s plenary of the Senate. Buhari hinged his decision on informed advice received from relevant Ministries, Departments and Agencies of government and in light of Nigerian realities and peculiarities. Without mincing words, the President withheld his assent, stating that the Electoral Act (Amendment) bill had serious adverse legal, financial, economic and security consequences. He added that it had implications on the rights of citizens to participate in government as constitutionally empowered. The President further argued that assenting the bill was an affront on right to freedom of association hence was undemocratic and amounted to undue interference in the affairs of political parties. He noted that the conduct of indirect primaries is internationally accepted, while also arguing that direct primaries are not free from manipulations and do not specifically guarantee the emergence of the will of people going by our own peculiarities of political practice. In sum, Buhari posited that political parties should be allowed to decide on whether direct or indirect mode of primaries. Buhari said he withheld assent to the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill 2021 in line with the provisions of Section 58(1) & (4) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

For many, the issue of the Electoral Act amendment has become an albatross of the administration of President Buhari. His deep reservations on some of the amendments, observers said, are usually at variance to the views and positions of other critical stakeholders in the polity and electoral system. For the Electoral Act (Amendment) 2021, some of his close allies had spoken the minds of the president before he formally elected to withhold his assent to the bill. Having studied his body language, they employed various antics to write off the proposition on direct primary for parties to choose their candidates for the next general election in the country. But it not clear if they had a foreknowledge of that was the mode of primary be included in the bill was the brain child of the authorities. They were said to have prodded some other influential forces to engage the National Assembly on the need to inject the clause in the Electoral Act 2021 amendments. At that stage, members of other power blocs, including the governors were not privy to the plan, until it became a subject of controversy, with the camps of governors and that of lawmakers being more the pronounced over the split within the rank of members of the political class on the clause. Reasons adduced by the different camps to strengthen their individual course of action ranged from the real to the sublime. While the pro-establishment elements gloated about what they regarded as the inclusiveness and cost-effectiveness of the direct mode of primary, the opposing forces claimed the demerits outstripped the so-called gains, especially with the paucity of fund and frightening insecurity across the country. There was also the fear that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) lacked the capacity to withstand the challenges that might arise. Among other issues raised by Buhari to withhold his assent were Increased cost, security challenge, people’s constitutional right to freedom of choice, plethora of litigations, whether direct primaries would end monetisation and manipulation.

Buhari expressed his reservations for the bill which intends to delete the provision for the conduct of indirect primaries in the nomination of party candidates such that party candidates henceforth only emerge through direct primaries. Buhari argued that the conduct of direct primaries across the 8,809 wards in the country will lead to a significant spike in the cost of conducting primary elections by parties. In the same vein, the letter noted that the adoption of direct primaries would lead to an increase in the cost of monitoring such elections by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) which has to deploy monitors across these wards each time a party is to conduct direct primaries for the presidential, gubernatorial and legislative posts. Concern was also raised on the fact that adoption with direct primaries will lead to huge financial burden on political parties, INEC and the economy in general. In addition, fears were raised that the situation will stifle smaller parties without enormous resources to mobilise party members for the primaries.

But analysing the issue of the Electoral Act (Amendment) bill, Governor Aminu Tambuwal said it was not necessarily about direct or indirect primary; neither was it about a battle for supremacy between members of the National Assembly and state governors, as Senator Kabiru Gaya, who has been vocal in pushing for the amendment that led into the inclusion of the clause on direct primary. The governor said: “Direct or indirect, I am for either. But let me tell you, it nothing about governors and the National assembly. It’s about our democracy. It is about our country. So, it not about the governors not supporting the direct mode of party primary; it is not about the National Assembly fighting the governors. That’s my opinion.”

Whereas the decision of President Buhari not to sign the bill did not come to many, including the national chairman of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), Chief Supo Shonibare, nonetheless they advocated more pragmatic steps to put an end to taking for granted the National Assembly and indeed the country.  This is just as there were indications that some major stakeholders have embarked on consultations across party lines towards forming a coalition to checkmate any members of the National Assembly that might try to frustrate the legislature from overriding the president on the bill. Shonibare, who gave the hint on the the ongoing consultations involving other political parties, ethnic nationalities and civil society groups to form a coalition to attain a paradigm shift in the way Mr President treats issues concerning the electoral Act amendment. He noted that the failure of the president to assent to the bill has serious implications for the electoral system.

According to the legal practitioner, in the current instance of failure of the president to assent to a bill to enable transparency and deepen the democratic culture, through processes that will enhance the integrity of the votes cast, the National Assembly must override the president and pass the bill with two thirds majority. While calling for a proactive action from all stakeholders to checkmate those elements against progress, he counselled: “All democratic forces; including civil societies, ethnic nationalities and political parties, must now begin to strategise and act in unison, to identify members of the National Assembly who do not support the patriotic Nationalist imperative of having to override the president’s refusal to give assent. We must therefore ensure that those members who do not support overriding the president’s refusal to assent to bill; irrespective of their political parties, or those who do not turn up for the vote count, are voted against in the various constituencies, to ensure that they no longer return to the National Assembly. Their names and constituencies must be listed, for this to be a targeted assignment at future elections. Those who may not support the amendment to the Electoral Act bill already passed by the National Assembly, across partisan party lines, are apostles of anti-democratic forces, currently pulling the fabric of the polity apart. There has to be a united rainbow coalition to ensure we adopt a single candidate in the constituencies of those aligning with the president, to vote them out in future elections. We are also considering the recall option for some that may be on this list, even before 2023.The Electoral Act also allows for such an approach.”

On his part, another prominent politician and pro-democracy activist, Mr Lanre Banjo claimed that the action of the president on the bill so far could be predicated on the advice he received from the Minister of Justice and Attorney general of the Federation, Abubakar Malami (SAN). “It is apparent that he would not sign it because Malami has advised against it. I pray the APC lawmakers should put the nation first and not Buhari. They should make history by overriding his veto power.

Also, a political scientist, Dr Gbade Ojo warned if the President assented the bill, it will amount to usurping the power of political parties to decide the modalities they want to adopt in picking their candidate. He added that if such assent is challenged by smaller parties, the courts rule in their favour and invalidate such assent by the President. The APC-led National Assembly has no right to impose their wish on all other political parties that should be free to decide whatever modalities they may like to adopt in picking their candidate. Should Mr President sign the bill the court may invalidate it if challenged by any if the smaller parties,” Ojo read.

A chieftain of the APC and Director General of the Voice of Nigeria, Chief Osita Okechukwu singled out the resolution on electronic transmission of results as the most important aspect of the bill, urging him not to throw away the baby with the bath water. I don’t think he needed to throw away the baby with the bath water. There is electronic transmission of results in the Bill. That for me, is the most important aspect. Direct or indirect primary is secondary,” Okechukwu said.

A leader of the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF), Mr Anthony Sani faulted the position of the Attorney General and Minister of justice on the bill as it affects the direct primaries by political parties. Sani said, ”I do not see how the provision for direct primary would affect the party’s constitutions which provide for both direct and indirect primaries. The place of Attorney General and minister of Justice in our democracy is to help improve our multiparty democracy with substantive and NOT technical justice.”