Rushed Clearance Of INEC Chair: For What?

 By Tonnie Iredia

Professor Joash Amupitan (SAN), outgoing Deputy Vice Chancellor (Administration) of the University of Jos is now the chairman of Nigeria’s electoral body – the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). The entire process of nomination, scrutiny, endorsement, approval and appointment was as far as the public was concerned concluded within a week.

*Amupitan

What was the speed for? Whereas background checks may have started much earlier when the President first ear-marked a candidate, we really didn’t need to present a rushed exercise to the public more so, as the position involved has not only become controversial but has also since moved into one that attracts much cynicism. 

The statement credited to the Presidency that Amupitan has become the first person to be appointed to the position from Kogi State is rather interesting. If it was a compensation to Kogi State and or the Northcentral zone, not many would readily know what the state/zone previously lost to push it to the forefront of compensation. What made it the turn of Kogi to produce the new INEC chair?  Was Kogi at this point the only state that was yet to hold the position?  Put differently, what or who zoned the position to Kogi State? It is hoped that the new appointee was not being inadvertently sensitized into remembering the relevance of his place of origin in a purely heterogeneous society.

Another seemingly innocuous adjective which emerged during the process was the term ‘apolitical.’Of course, a look at Amupitan’s credentials would immediately reveal the life of a non-partisan citizen. Unfortunately, the term can no longer be reliably identified from credentials. A few professors that were recently jailed for announcing fake election results in favour of partisan sponsors also paraded intimidating credentials. Thus, history cannot permit us to merely take a look at the credentials of an intellectual in Nigeria and conclude that such a person can pass for a non-partisan citizen of integrity. We don’t need to go as far as Akwa Ibom before running into cheap university dons who have been protected from prosecution.

To be fair to the President, his mandate is not to search ‘ad infinitum’ for a clearly suitable candidate. His role is to nominate a person that appears to him to be suitable for the job. But to ensure that he arrives at a generally acceptable candidate, two other bodies, the National Council of State and the Senate were under the principle of checks and balances mandated to examine a nominee with a view to arriving at a fit and proper person to hold the position. Both bodies ought to have known that the position of INEC chair is quite sensitive especially as it is among only a few isolated for clearance. Therefore, much more was expected than the involvement of both bodies in the latest exercise of appointing a boss for INEC.

Based on the point already made about the importance of the position in question, the role of members of the National Council of State as opinion moulders is quite significant. Indeed, the approval of the Council provides some degree of legitimacy and credibility to the nominee. The unanimous approval of Amupitan’s appointment, is thus no doubt a reflection by the Council of the confidence of its members in the appointee’s capacity and capability to lead the sensitive body. What they have said is that in their opinion, Amupitan can ensure free and fair elections which have eluded Nigeria since 1999, when democracy was restored to the country.

While it is true that the National Council of State is a purely advisory body, its suggestions, recommendations and endorsements are not expected to be handled with levity. The only thing its members cannot do is to insist that the position they put forward on national issues must be obeyed. But they cannot exculpate themselves from blame if Amupitan or any office holder they endorsed performs woefully. This is why the body like similar institutions must be circumspect in endorsing what they hardly understand. It is a pity that a nomination they were hardly aware about before their meeting was unanimously supported by them. There is in fact the rumour that the INEC appointment was not originally scheduled for discussion.

What the Council of State should have declared is not a unanimous but a cautionary approval. They should have just said that their approval was based on the documents before them adding that they were not in a position to contradict the credentials of the nominee. That would have propelled the Senate into recognizing that her own pivotal role is diligently handled. In truth, the Senate is the only body that has a duty to ensure that anyone it clears to occupy a top position would like Caesar’s wife be above board. But we didn’t see any evidence that such a posture was adopted by the Upper legislative chambers. To start with, the Senate proceeded into confirmation rather than information gathering as soon as the nomination was received.

Rather than allow the relevant committee to organize some follow-up checks, the Senate immediately usurped the role of the committee making it impossible for those with the appropriate background to provide technical guidance. That was not all. Only about 20 questions were allowed to be asked from a body whose numerical strength stood at 109 members with none surprisingly on suspension. What was the purpose of the hurry? Was there fear that something unpleasant may happen if the exercise was not gagged?  Again, instead of allowing a robust engagement in which every question was answered, the questions were deliberately grouped to give the nominee a discretion to harp on his preferred area.

Considering the amount of damage that the conduct of elections has inflicted on the psyche of the typical Nigerian, why was the event reduced to hours and not days? Should the clearance not have lasted long enough to convince everybody that no one had anything to hide? To make matters worse, the Senate invoked its usual preferred strategy – obsession with voice voting, thereby preventing the opportunity of the sanctity of choice. At a time like this when powerful office holders like governors are unable to hold their own, who would openly object to or delay the making of a new INEC chair and risk his chance of re-election? Even opposition politicians were quietly on their seats pretending to be mature lawmakers.

Through fear, Senators lost the opportunity of being at par with the executive or even serving as a veritable check. They left everyone into believing that Amupitan had intimidating credentials and that he was exceedingly brilliant and competent as if that is all that INEC needs. Of course, INEC needs far more than that. His inexplicable 2023 glitch notwithstanding, Mahmood Yakubu was a star intellectual. So was Attahiru Jega who handed over to Yakubu. Before them, we have had brilliant professors. Two of such intellectuals, Eme Awa and Humphrey Nwosu were not just professors but outstanding political scientists. When Nwosu was appointed to replace Awa, government reminded the whole world that he had a first-class degree. How did he end?

Is it not superfluous that we keep doing the same thing while expecting different results? Is brilliance, intellectualism etc., the problem of INEC? Why is it that wonderful citizens who are great achievers in their different professions and occupations are always made to fail whenever they are picked to head our electoral commissions? Will the political class allow Amupitan to work? Will they not put politicians around him to mess him up? Will other agencies involved in elections in the country allow for free and fair elections? I doubt if the current method of approving the appointment of INEC chairmen is really adequate. I think we have now reached a junction where the Senate should invite interviewers to ask nominees questions while senators listen and make decisions. 

Now that the INEC chair is a distinguished Senior Advocate of Nigeria, it would have been nice to find out what would make him resign his appointment. For example, the collation of votes is simply an electoral function but some years ago, our Supreme Court decided to take over the function during a governorship election. Their Lords added some votes, while subtracting others and at the end declared a winner to whom they allocated more votes than voters. If care is not taken, the situation will recur some day because unlike what happens elsewhere, INEC bosses are usually too comfortable to resign their appointments. Best wishes to Professor Amupitan while hoping that those hailing him now will not vilify him when it is convenient.

*Dr. Iredia is a commentator on public issues