By Bassey Ewa Henshaw
“Once to every man and nation
Comes the moment to decide
In the strife of truth with
falsehood
For the good or evil side
Some great cause, some great
decision
Each offering the bloom or
blight
And the choice goes by forever
Twixt that darkness and that
light.”
—James Russell Lowell
*Akpabio and TinubuAnd indeed, the INEC Amendment Bill presents such a moment. A moment of great decision. It is the moment when we all must choose between transparency, credibility and trust or manipulation, doubt and suspicion. It is a moment when silence is not golden and we must all speak up and side with the truth.
I was a member
of the 5th and 6th Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria
and was thus privileged to witness and participate in some of the golden
moments of the Senate. The defeat of the third term agenda in 2006 was one of
such golden moments. Following attempts to amend the Nigerian Constitution
to extend the term limit of the president from two to three or even longer and
the perceived manipulation and political intimidation that appeared to
characterisse the move, the Senate under the leadership of Senate President Ken
Nnamani voted against and defeated the move.
Another
golden moment was when the Senate invoked the Doctrine of Necessity and
adopted a resolution which empowered then Vice President Goodluck
Jonathan to act as President with authority to discharge full presidential
functions when President Musa Yar’ Adua was incapacitated. The then Attorney
General and Minister of Justice had sought to convince the Senate that a
Federal High Court in Abuja had ruled that the Vice President was already
discharging presidential functions and there was, therefore, no need for any
further action.
However,
the question arose as to why it was necessary to take the 2009 Supplementary
Appropriation Bill abroad for President Yar’ Adua to sign if Vice President
Jonathan was actually already discharging full presidential functions. It
became evident that the Senate was not being told the truth.
Hence, under the leadership of
Senate President David Mark, the Senate adopted the motion of the Doctrine of
Necessity that gave Vice President Jonathan full powers to act.
The
Senate plays an extremely important and critical role in the protection
and development of our democracy.
Therefore,
it is an institution that must command the trust and respect of the Nigerian
people. As one who has spent eight years in the hallowed Red Chambers, I
feel an obligation to contribute by speaking out, not to criticise or vilify,
but to protect and enhance the image of the Senate.
Last
weekend, my brother Distinguished Senator Efiong Bob launched his book,
The Burden of Legislators in Nigeria. Much of the contents of the book were
a catalogue of real life experiences of colleagues who have passed through
the crucible of seeking nomination and election into the Legislature,
including the Senate.
All
who spoke agreed that the burdens legislators have to bear are enormous and
assume different forms including imposition of unpopular candidates
and the challenge of godfatherism, high expectations and unending
personal demands from constituents as well as a lack of understanding of
the job of law making amongst others.
In the course of
his remarks during the event, the incumbent Senate President, His
Excellency Godswill Akpabio made reference to the controversy
surrounding Section 60(3) of the INEC Amendment Bill now before the
National Assembly. The Section seeks to make it mandatory for INEC
presiding officers to transmit election results electronically in real
time from the polling units directly to the INEC server. The Senate President
drew attention to the frequent collapse of our national grid and the
consequent power failures.
He also spoke about the
lack and/or unreliability of telecommunications networks across the
country. Not surprisingly, at the emergency plenary of the Senate held on
Tuesday, February 10th, to confirm the votes and proceedings of its
earlier session, the Senate affirmed the Senate President’s concerns by
attaching a proviso to the clause requiring electronic transmission of
results. The proviso allows for manual collation and the use of Form EC8A
in the event of network failure.
The
former Senate President, David Mark, who was chairman of the book launch did
make a simple rebuttal. He said that all that was required of the Senate was to
pass the law in accordance with the wishes of the Nigerian people. The question
of whether the law could be implemented should be left for INEC to decide. I
found it ironic that legislators lamenting the burden they already carry
appeared anxious to take on the additional burden of INEC by making arguments
for INEC as to whether the law could or could not be implemented. Why does the
Senate want to take on the burden of INEC in addition to its own?
There
is no gainsaying that the manual collation of election results and
the mutilation and manipulation of figures that characterise this process
have been at the heart of most controversies and litigation that trail
elections in Nigeria.
Nigerians
have a deep distrust of manual collation of results because they believe
that the process is corrupt and often undermines the wishes of the people.
That is why they are insisting on electronic transmission from the
polling units in real time. Therefore, the Senate has a duty to make laws
in accordance with the wishes of the people.
It is the responsibility of INEC to
ensure that they deliver on their mandate. It is their duty to liase with
internet service providers to ensure that services function during the two
or three days when elections are conducted. It is their duty to liase with the
various power holding companies to ensure power supply. They can invest in
Starlink’s internet service, which many have found to provide reliable internet
connections around the world. Additionally, Starlink modems can also be moved
around. There are numerous options that INEC can explore to ensure they deliver
transparent and credible elections.
India,
with nearly 1 billion voters uses technology to conduct its elections and
delivers undisputed results within a day or two of voting. Nigeria’s voting
population is less than 10 per cent of India’s. So why can’t our law require
INEC to use technology in its entire voting process? In any case, INEC has not
raised any concerns about their ability to deliver. On the contrary, they have
always assured that they can deliver acceptable election results using
technology.
I
believe that the wishes of all Nigerians is to have transparent, credible
and acceptable elections. I also believe that Nigerians want the results
of voting transmitted electronically from the polling unit to the IREV,
INEC’s portal. His Excellency, the Senate President did express confidence
about his party’s victory at the 2027 elections.
He
said that only those who saw defeat starring them in the face were complaining
about whether or not voting results should be electronically transmitted
in real time. I have no way of challenging this confidence. The only point
that can be made is that nothing should be done to taint this expected
victory with doubt, suspicion or distrust. The victory will be sweet if
voting is seen to be transparent and credible.
The job of the National Assembly is different from that
of INEC. As representatives of the people, the job of the
National Assembly is to pass the laws that the people want. It is the job
of INEC to conduct elections in accordance with the law. The dichotomy between
the two roles is simple and clear enough. I therefore hope that the National
Assembly Conference Committee is fully conscious of the wishes of Nigerians and
will act accordingly without any provisions or conditionalities.
*Henshaw was a Senator in the 5th and 6th National Assembly.

No comments:
Post a Comment