Organising
The 2007 Election
By
Adele Jinadu
culled from
GUARDIAN, March 27, 2005
My point of departure is the
observation that, under liberal democratic theory, the indeterminacy of
elections, in the sense of providing opportunity for yesterday's losers to
become today's winners, and yesterday's winners to become today's losers,
presupposes, indeed demands and is, to a large extent, a function of an
impartial and efficient administration of elections. To say this is in effect to
hypothesise that the critical problem of electoral administration in our country
is to ensure the indeterminacy of elections.
It is for this reason that it is
always important to turn our searchlight on electoral administration, in its
various dimensions, in our country. However, that searchlight must not be a
limited one. It must go beyond such critical and conditioning institutional,
basically process questions, for example about the powers and functions of
electoral bodies and about electoral laws and electoral systems to include the
no less and perhaps more important conditioning structural questions relating to
the resolution of the social question of democratic development in our country.
As I have pointed out elsewhere, "The
problem of electoral administration, and by implication, of the liberal
democratic project in Africa, cannot therefore be dissociated from the
possibilities for resolving the fundamental problem of underdevelopment and the
prospects for structural transformation of Africa economies.
If the social question is to be viewed in the medium - to longer - term
perspectives, there are, however, short-term consideration, relating to some
more immediately pressing institutional/process issues, which must be addressed
as we prepare for 2007. In this respect, and with due acknowledgement of the
ponderous odds INEC had to contend with as 2003 approached, I would like to
suggest that it would not be too early now for INEC to begin preparation for
2007 and to issue a preliminary programme of activities leading up to 2007 and
take definite decisions about some of the logistic and related organisational
matters concerning the administration of the 2007 general elections.
Part of the problem with INEC as 2003
approached was that it was not proactive enough and, for that reason, was
enmeshed in a web of avoidable tardy preparations and needless diversions, which
gave those who would subvert the electoral process ample opportunity to exploit
the situation. INEC should try to avoid this and have the electoral process, as
we approach 2007, firmly under its control.
Let me identify, without elaboration
but the more to provoke discussion, some of such institution/process issues:
voter education; voter registration; the recruitment and training of election
officials; information about and access of voting centres, and the number of
such centres to ensure access by all voters; the voting period and the secrecy
of voting; the nature of the ballot box and the ballot itself; the mode of
appointment, composition and tenure of the electoral body; and the revision and
vigorous enforcement of the electoral laws to make for more credible and
effective administration of elections, making it more difficult for those who
would rather subvert the electoral process to do so, and especially with respect
to electioneering guidelines, election finance and election tribunals.
Let me now make passing reference to
four critical issues that have tended to be neglected in discussing the
administration of elections in this country. The first is the place of party
primaries in the broader canvass of electoral administration as the anchor of
democratic consolidation in our country. I was privy to the discussion and
decision leading to the institutionalisation of party primaries as an integral
aspect of the fledgling party system in 1990/1991; and it was an innovation
which the late Shehu Musa Yar'Adua welcomed as presaging a promising future for
electoral politics in the country.
How painful it is that the vision
that informed its introduction seemed to have been lost and what we have
experienced about party primaries in recent years is nothing but a charade, a
departure from the democratic impulses that informed its introduction. Here, as
in many other aspects of its supervisory powers, the electoral body has not been
as forceful, firm and proactive as it should have been, in nudging the parties
to conduct credible primaries and in line with their party constitutions. In a
sense, there is a connection between party primaries and electoral
administration: if parties allow their party primary process to be violated at
will, and conducted without regard to their party constitutions, there is a
sense in which they will approach the conduct of national elections with the
same psychological orientation, if they exhibit lack of discipline in conducting
their party primaries, they will, perhaps, be more disposed to exhibiting even
more indiscipline in inter-party competitive elections.
Given the huge logistical and heavy
financial outlays necessary for electoral administration, arising from the size
and diverse topography of our country, the second is our failure to pay much
attention to the necessarily inter-agency and collaborative nature of electoral
administration in the country. As we approach 2007, we must advert our minds to
what needs to be done to secure this collaborative process from abuse through
the use of the power of incumbency to subvert it. In short, the inter-agency
nature of electoral administration, with all its implications for the autonomy
of the electoral body, if not artfully managed, could as well be the Achilles'
heels of electoral administration in the country, creating fissures which could
be exploited by those who would like to subvert the electoral process. Related
to this is the need for INEC to create and train a pool of election officials
from which it can draw to officiate during elections.
My third observation is about the
role of internal election monitors. INEC should encourage the creation of a
consortium of internal election monitors, with which it should establish liaison
and partnership on a formal basis, taking them into confidence, in securing the
sanctity of the electoral process. Fourthly, the role of research in the
administration of elections need to be underscored. We need to adopt a
knowledge-based approach, utilising applied social science to the understanding
and solution of problems of election administration in the country, and to the
study of elections and electoral behaviour in the country.
Professor Jinadu is with the Centre
for Advanced Social Science in Port Harcourt, Rivers State
