THERE has been heightened anxiety over the delay by President Muhammadu Buhari in signing the Electoral Act Amendment Bill 2021 into law. This is more so as the period allowed by the Constitution has run out. The president received the bill on November 30 and had 60 days to assent or reject it. Another rejection by the president might open doors for more controversies that might end in up in the National Assembly wielding the power of veto.
Controversy has continued to dog the bill since it started its journey in the 8th National Assembly. Few months to the 2019 general elections, the National Assembly had sent the bill to President Buhari for assent but it was returned as the president raised some issues which he claimed constrained him from assenting to the bill. The shortness of time to implement some of the provisions before the 2019 elections was also cited in some quarters as one of the reasons for the rejection of the bill at that time.
The 9th Senate took over from where its predecessor stopped and again passed the bill. It however rejected the suggestion of providing for the electronic transfer of election results. This generated an uproar which forced the National Assembly to backtrack. It eventually added the provision for electronic transfer of results by the National Electoral Commission (INEC). It added another provision which prescribes Direct Primaries for the election of party candidates for general elections. The provision threw up another round of controversy, pitching state governors against the legislators.
The provision is believed to have been deliberately inserted in the bill by the legislators to curtail the influence of state governors who often use their wide powers to determine who gets what from their respective states. The governors thought it was a self-serving provision and kicked against it, but the legislators pushed back.
The controversy over direct primaries has seemingly given the president another cause to foot-drag on signing the bill. He sent it to both INEC and the Office of the Attorney General for advice; especially as the issue of high cost of implementation was presented by the governors as their main reason for opposing the provision. INEC did not seem to have any serious problems with the provision going by its response to the president’s inquest, but the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, seems to have a problem with the provision.
According to media reports, Malami claims mandatory direct primaries could cause confusion within the parties because it would mean that they will have to amend their respective constitutions. His problem is not really that the provision offends any section of the Nigerian Constitution, but that existing political parties had already stated in their respective constitutions how to select their candidates.
Both provisions on direct primaries and electronic transfer of results seem to have the backing of a cross section of the Nigerian public, going by opinions in the public space. A majority, from all indications, agrees that the powers wielded by the governors must be checked if true democracy is to take root in the country. They also agree that the antics of politicians must be curbed to allow for free and fair elections. They insist on electronic transfer of results if votes must count in the democratic process.
We also support both provisions in the bill as they will strengthen the electoral process and lead to credible polls. They have inherent capacities to check the influence of powerful forces that often sabotage the emergence of truly popular candidates at the poll.
Although there are chances that INEC might encounter some logistics challenges at the beginning, we believe that it would serve the process better if the Commission handles the conduct of party primaries, just as they do with general elections. It can initiate ways to navigate the challenges and put in place measures to monitor the process for credibility sake. It is the most visible way of breaking the stranglehold of state governors, and enhancing the electoral process.
State governors exercise power, authority and influence over the democratic machinery and have near absolute monopoly in the process of selecting candidates for elections. Direct primary has the potential of check mating that monopoly. Whatever can be done to whittle down the power and influence of state governors in the electoral process must be given a forceful push.
Nigerians seem to have delivered their verdict on the Electoral Act having taken part in the public hearings that led to the amendment of the bill. They did so again when the National Assembly rejected the inclusion of electronic transfer of results. When the issue of direct primaries became controversial, they also spoke with a loud voice in affirmation. INEC says it does not have issues with the bill as passed, so long as no provision interferes with its statutory powers to conduct free and fair election.
That leaves the president with a fair chance to go ahead to give consent for the bill to become law. The president has repeatedly said he was all for a free and fair democratic process. This is another opportunity for him to prove it and consolidate his position. We urge him not to miss this golden chance.
The process for the delivery of a sound and credible poll in 2023 must start early. The pending bill is the instrument that would facilitate that realisation. If signed now, a test-run can be conducted with the Ekiti and Osun states’ governorship elections next year and whatever flaws are spotted in the process can be remedied before the 2023 general elections.
Our position is that the president should end the waiting game and sign the bill for a credible democratic process to begin. It is already getting late and we no longer have the luxury of time. If the president, for whatever reasons again refuses to sign the bill, the National Assembly should do the needful and use their veto power. If public opinion is anything to go by, those in favour of the provisions in the bill seem more than those against it. The desire of a few vested interests must not be allowed to override the overall interest of the country and its democratic process.
