In 2024, Polling Units became marketplaces for vote buying- Itodo, Yiaga Africa ED
Executive Secretary of Yiaga Africa, Samson Itodo, speaks on the need for President Bola Tinubu to appoint persons of integrity into the Independent National Electoral Commission to sustain citizens’ trust in the electoral body. In this interview on Channels TV’ Politics Today’ monitored by David Lawani, the Executive Director, whose non-profit organisation promotes participatory democracy, human rights, and civic participation, decried the lack of strong opposition leaders checking the excesses of the executive arm of the government, among other issues
What is your evaluation of what played out in 2024 as far as election management is concerned?
In 2024, four types of elections were conducted. We had two off-cycle elections- Edo and Ondo states and bye-elections. 2024 started with bye-elections and then rerun elections in 37 constituencies. We had bye-elections in seven states, off-cycle elections, and reruns, and when we say rerun elections, we mean elections that were ordered by the courts, especially those that arose from the judgments in the tribunals and appellate courts, resignations, and deaths. So, INEC had to conduct bye-elections to fill those vacant seats. The last sets of elections were the local government elections. Last year, we had 28 LGA elections in 28 states. When you look across at the elections and the lessons we take, I think the first significant takeaway from the elections that were held in 2024 was that though we had challenges of perennial election logistics, those challenges are surmountable because we saw an improvement in the manner and management of elections logistics in the states in some of the elections. Whether the bye-elections or off-cycle elections, we ended the year with the Ondo elections. The REC in Ondo did perform excellently well in managing the logistics for that election. As of 7 am, based on Yiaga Africa’s report, election officials had arrived in 71 percent of the polling units. So, we can deal with our logistical issues as long as election managers and administrators pay attention to details and hold those transport unions accountable.
What lessons did you take home?
The key lesson from the 2024 is that INEC must ensure that the capture of sex is accurate. We saw how the incumbent captured our election management body in states vested in political interest. You could see how Yiaga Africa saw in the local government elections that they were a travesty of democratic elections because they didn’t meet the integrity test. You had a situation where governors were handling procurement, and they didn’t provide the SIECS the necessary opportunity to handle that. What we saw in most of the elections was simply the allocation of votes without counting the ballots that voters have cast on the day of the election. For INEC, you saw what happened in the Edo election and how issues around competency played out. When you look at Edo and Ondo states, you can see that the REC in Ondo, as a former INEC Director, had the capacity to manage the election compared to Edo, where issues around the competence and neutrality of the REC played out.
How would you assess the issue of vote buying?
One of the darkest sides of the elections in 2024 was how polling units were converted to marketplaces. One vote costs between N5,000 and N20,000, a mockery of our electoral process. These are fundamental issues. In the build-up to other off-season elections in 2025 and the 2027 general elections, we have got to fix these issues relating to the attitude of politicians on the bent to continue to buy votes and also voters who sell those votes. When you look at technology, one of the other sides is that we have been increasingly seeing this mockery of these two technological innovations that INEC introduced to sanitise the process. The BVAS and the IReV. We have seen politicians succeed in rolling back most reforms and innovations. That is sad and doesn’t tell us much about the future of elections in this country.
How do we start insulating state elections from the overbearing influence of governors?
We need to do four things. First, we meet to amend the Constitution to guarantee the operational independence of the State Independent Electoral Commission. The way the Constitution is construed at the moment subjects the operational autonomy of the state independence Electoral Commission to the control of the governors. Whereas, when it comes to INEC, the Constitution is clear that the power of INEC to issue its guidelines shall not be subject to the approval of the authority of the President. So, we need to replicate that as we speak. That is the first thing we need to do. The second thing to do is guarantee the financial independence of the state electoral commissions. The SIECs don’t have financial independence, so governors can starve them of funds. But at the federal level, you have an Electoral Act 2022 that already provides that the funding for INEC shall get to the Commission one year before the election. Also, the Constitution put INEC in first-line charge of the consolidated revenue of the federation. However, in the state, there are only two institutions on the consolidated revenue of the states. The State Civil Service Commission. We need to amend the Constitution so as to enable it to guarantee the financial autonomy of the state-independent electoral commission. The third thing you will need to do is provide and protect the tenure of LGA councils as it stands today; even though with the Supreme Court judgment, some sections of the Electoral Act, especially section 150, provide the tenure of LGAs to four years, the Constitution is still silent. There is a great need to protect the LGA tenure so that it regularise the conduct of elections. And lastly, it is about the dissolution of local government councils. We have the Supreme Court, which has laid this to rest, but we have also seen the politicisation of the ruling of the Supreme Court. These are the four things we need to do, and it will strike state governors of their stronghold on the SIECs.
Is the sacking of the democratically elected local government council chairmen despite the Supreme Court ruling not in conflict with the Constitution?
I wouldn’t get into Edo State’s politics for obvious reasons. But I want to highlight the fact that you see many of these anomalies within our polity because there is an exploitation of gaps within the constitutional jurisprudence, and this is where the courts have a role to play. First, the state Assembly Act within its constitutional competence by removing a democratically suspending local government council chairmen. Do they have the power to do so? The state assemblies have the power to make laws. The question is, when you make those laws, what are the principles that underpin those laws? The whole concept of separation of powers is clear, and many politics underpins that action, in my view. I don’t think it is right for a legislative body to suspend an elected executive body, especially if it is not established that they have run afoul of the law or specific procedures. Again, that is politics for the people of Edo State. However, I think what is critical is that I agree with the Attorney General of the Federation based on his comment. For a situation like this, despite there might be political reasons, we need first to protect the Constitution. My position is that the local government chairmen have been elected. They are elected because the Constitution provides for the local government administration, and the state also provides that. The only people who can remove or suspend them are the legislative council at the level. I have also read that one of the local government council’s legislative arm did take action in that regard. At the end of the day, all this will have to go to the court for a ruling, but above all of this, they need to be guided. The issue of our Constitution and the opportunities that this presents for the National Assembly currently amending and reviewing the Constitution. We must see how we can protect this undue influence or any incursion into the democratic institution instituted to preserve democracy and accountability at the local government level.
How unhealthy is having a weak opposition in a democracy like ours?
It is very unhealthy to have a weak opposition. Democracy is about competition and competitive ideas. You need strong political institutions to hold the executive and the incumbent to account. When you take that out of democracy, you will have an emerging one-party state. And when you have a one-party state, the chances of accountability are diminished. However, because no one is watching, opposition parties must also think deeply about their roles in a democracy. And I am disappointed with some of the opposition parties. Because when you look at other climes, opposition parties are driven by strong ideas. Strong ideas do not just drive them, but they also help them understand the concept of governance. And they don’t play to the gallery. There is a lot of playing in the gallery in our own space. And that is unfortunate. Because of some critical questions that you expect opposition parties not to be asked and because you put the fire under the feet of the incumbent, they have abdicated their responsibility to civil society and the media to perform their functions. They sit aloof, and when there is a result, they are the first to capitalize on it. I think opposition parties must rise to engage governance from a data-driven point of use and evidence. They should also provide an alternative. You should be able to give options for doing things better rather than bickering. When you look at these opposition parties, many of them are nothing short of special-purpose vehicles. They are not engaging in constructive debates. Some of them have yielded their platforms for external forces captured by forces. Many of the leadership tussles you see within those parties are embarrassing. I am embarrassed to see that parties in the political space for over 20 years still deal with fundamental issues of building internal consensus within parties or even in leadership selection. How is it that at a time in our history, the three major parties in our political history are having a leadership crisis? Or crisis relating to membership questions or the accuracy of their data. So, it is not just the opposition parties. However, we need to have a national conversation about how we can build the structure of virile parties that don’t just aggregate social interests but also have a sense of national purpose and identity. They can communicate that to people and mobilize their citizens around a common agenda that delivers food to people’s tables and provides security, welfare, and quality healthcare. But you don’t see all of that happening currently.
What should the youth push for regarding electoral reform before the President’s proposed national youth conference?
The point about tax reform is that Nigeria needs reform. It is good we have that conversation on reform ongoing, but electoral reform, the youth conference, and what they need to do are as follows. Four things. The President needs to be called to articulate its electoral reform agenda. It is two years, and in February 2025, in a couple of weeks, we will be midterm to the last election. And the President has not articulated his electoral reform agenda. So, he needs to do that. There is a need to legitimise the electronic transmission of results. Currently, we have manual trans-collation and transmission of results. But, just like the Supreme Court had advised, there is a great need to provide legal protection for using IReV. We need electronic transmission and collation nit as a substitute for manual collation. But to have both go hand in hand to serve as a check. That way, it strengthens IReV. The 2nd relates to the timeliness for concluding election disputes before swearing-in. There is a great need to conclude an electoral dispute before swearing-in. But that way, it will address issues around distractions and things about the bandwagon effect. And it will also strengthen the independence of the institution. The third critical thing is about early voting or special voters. INEC officials, security agents, media organizations, and election observers must cast their votes. We are talking about close to four million voters. These are some of the issues that need to be on the table. And lastly, it is about the appointment of INEC officials. Suppose we will have a credible 2027 election or even before then. We need a very strong and independent INEC. And it begins with the caliber of people appointed to the electoral commission.
How long has Prof Mahmood Yakubu been in office as INEC chairman?
Based on the Constitution, Prof Mahmood Yakubu should leave by December 2025. So, we will have a new INEC Chairman, and the calibre of persons appointed must meet the constitutional threshold or condition of non-partisanship and impeccable character. However, we need the President to act as a statesman and nominate individuals to the INEC who can provide the transparent leadership we need. And not people with partisan leanings because we have seen the last couple of appointments. Individuals with partisan leaning are appointed to the electoral commission, which has dampened citizens’ trust not just for the electoral process but for INEC as an institution. So, the President needs to rise above politics. Appoint individuals who command respect and integrity so that their actions legitimise the outcomes of elections.
