The flawed Anambra election

 By Aruviere Martin Egharhevwa

The greatest fear, perhaps, of the inconclusive governorship election in Anambra State eight days ago, is that the next general election in the country is threatened. Anambra was, for the purpose of that election, a prototype Nigeria; and if INEC could not arrange a hitch-free poll in one state, how can it do so in about 30 states simultaneously? This fear is not unfounded going by events in Anambra. Besides, the fact that the much hyped election was inconclusive and a winner could not be declared, the entire exercise was dogged by many irregularities, thereby raising fears for a free and fair election in 2015. Certainly, Anambra did not portend positive signals for future elections.





Events before the election gave hope that it would be hitch-free. The Independent National Electoral Commission had mobilised the security apparatus, brought in 21 electoral commissioners including the resident commissioner, and appointed a university vice chancellor as presiding officer. These, combined with the lessons of previous elections, elicited expectations of a free and fair contest. But contrary to the high expectation, sundry contradictions surfaced. These included late arrival of polling materials, omission of names from the electoral register, non-mobilisation of NYSC electoral officials financially to move to their duty stations, while undergraduates were used to replace the NYSC officials. Above all, there was suspected collusion by INEC officials with some political parties ostensibly to undermine the electorate.





Given the above contradictions, the outcome was easily predictable – an electoral fiasco. The election was declared inconclusive. A hurriedly rescheduled exercise in Idemili North Local Council compounded the process to the extent that no winner was declared. Initial results put the All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA) candidate, Willie Obiano in the lead, followed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate, Tony Nwoye and All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, Chris Ngige. But it was impossible for the electoral officials to declare a winner. INEC, after considering the difference between the highest scorer APGA and the runner-up PDP decided that for the election to be acceptable, the valid votes must be more than the cancelled votes.Electoral malpractices in Anambra State have become a recurring decimal. In the 2003 and 2007 elections, similar irregularities were experienced.



The contradictions of the election have once again underlined the problem of electoral misconduct that have bedeviled the country since independence and have incrementally worsened over the years.However, the bigger issue is that if election could not be conclusive in a single state despite the concentration of resources, both human and financial, it portends serious implication for nation-wide electoral exercise. Something is fundamentally wrong. The problem this time is not the Anambra people who have significantly conducted themselves peacefully despite massive disenfranchisement. It lies squarely on the laps of the umpire, INEC.



Pointing accusing fingers to the politicians under the circumstances would be diversionary. The administration of the election was fundamentally flawed as manifested in the attendant problems. The electoral umpire’s credibility as an institution has been seemingly compromised in this exercise. If the election was well conducted, the hiccups would have been avoided. The failure of INEC to pull through the Anambra election is demoralizing; and it accentuates in no small measure, the body’s capacity to conduct next year’s elections.





INEC Chairman Attahiru Jega admitted that the election was sabotaged by his own staff. While this is not in doubt, the blame must be put squarely on the Commission. This is the failure of leadership despite structural underpinnings. Under liberal democracy, election is not a one-day event; rather it is a process. The point at issue is the failure of the electoral institution more than the constraints of the actual conduct of election itself. It translates into a colossal waste of resources, which Nigerians have supportingly put at the disposal of INEC through the various electoral reforms.





What happened in effect was a damning example of how an institution can single handedly derail the course of a country. Besides, it is an indictment of the country’s leadership, and in particular, the electoral umpire, that 14 years into the fourth republic, the expected culture of conducting free elections is yet to take root. This Anambra election is significant for the singular reason that it was supposed to be the litmus test of coming electoral exercises, especially the next general election. Sadly the exercise has not only undermined the optimism of a hitch-free general election next year, it casts a huge pall of illusion on the future of the country’s democracy.



Having accepted responsibility for the present quagmire arising from the election, INEC has a duty to correct the identified and the hidden anomalies; and sanction those responsible as appropriate. Above all, it must ensure that the election ultimately and fully reflects the genuine desire of the Anambra people.