There are reports that during a very long and all-inclusive meeting on Tuesday 5th of April, that is yesterday, INEC reviewed its preparations for the elections of the 9th, 16th and 26th of April. It is reasonable to assume that INEC took a long and hard look at its failures and weaknesses which led to the cancellation of last Saturday’s elections and the rescheduling of all three elections. A number of important decisions were reported to have been taken by INEC so it is important that INEC communicates these decisions to the public effectively. Those issues that are still being examined by INEC should also be decided upon long before Saturday, 9th April so that voters will go to the polls informed and prepared to both vote, and behave as good citizens.
One of the decisions reportedly adopted by INEC is that only a maximum of 300 voters will be allowed to vote at any one unit. The rationale behind this rather radical review is that it will allow for enough time to accredit voters before voting, and specifically address the huge problems we witnessed last Saturday when up to 1000 voters or more turned up at many polling centers to vote. Since INEC has insisted on a separate accrediting and voting processes, it is important that sufficient attention is paid to the management of both processes.
The reduction of the member of voters to a maximum of 300 will address the issue of number, but it has to be managed very carefully, because it could cause more problems than it will solve. In the fist place, what this decision will entail is that there will have to be many more polling units. More election officials will have to be recruited, trained and deployed before Saturday. The Register of voters will have to be re-structured to conform with the new number at each polling unit, and voters will have to be availed an opportunity before accreditation to see where they will vote. Security personnel will be stretched to cover more units. Political Parties and candidates will have to recruit, pay and deploy more agents to new units. Election officials will need to be given exact numbers of ballot papers that are consistent with the numbers of voters at each unit. Polling units will have to be numbered properly, and be placed within wards and Local Government documentation so that they are properly and legally captured in the election formats. All these need to be done properly, on time, and the voting public needs to be adequately informed.
A second problem relates to INEC’s capacity and ability to put these changes in place, and retain public confidence. There were many problems with people identifying their polling units last Saturday. Very large units had been broken up, and many voters who traditionally went to registration units which also doubled as voting centers, could not locate their names. There was much agitation, therefore, before the election were aborted. This new decision of INEC to limit the number of voters to 300 per unit will compound the situation, unless INEC succeeds in reaching out to the public and sorting out all problems relating to polling units and register of voters. Even the most optimistic and sympathetic observer of INECs capacities will acknowledge that this will be a very difficult task for INEC to accomplish. So a fair point to make is that while the idea of creating a manageable number of voters per units is good, it may be difficult to manage, given the poor record of INEC in public education and the very little time it has left to ensure that the change is given effect without widespread confusion and restiveness on Saturday.
If the INEC leadership succeeds in ensuring that its officials at State and lower levels do their work properly, it will reduce many of the problems voters are likely to encounter on Saturday. The issue of locating voting centers is one. Another is making sure that polling officials do not play a fast one on voters by claiming that they have received fewer ballot papers than the number of registered voters at polling units. Election materials and personnel must arrive on time and with all materials intact. Yet another is the need for clarifications on what voters should do after they cast their ballots.
Nigerians will be hoping that INEC’s many problems have been adequately addressed in such way that they do not become the nation’s many problems. Many Nigerians still believe that professor Jega is a sincere and honest Nigerian, but many are intensely suspicious that he will be overcome by the tricks of some politicians and the weaknesses and greed of some of the people he has to work with. Already, evidences of lack of organizational capacity and serious logistical failures have exposed his weaknesses which can be exploited. There are dangerous speculations about the fate and custody of used and unused sensitive materials, such as ballot papers and marked registers. In an environment of deep and widespread suspicion regarding the conduct of polling officials and security agents, every step must be taken to ensure that the public is carried along with any changes or amendments INEC makes to its rules or plans.
At this stage of the preparations for the elections, INEC must not do anything that will further compound or complicate its problems. The issue of a ceiling of 300 voters per unit must be handled very carefully, and if necessary, INEC should allow its Resident Electoral Commissioners some leverage to affect changes and amendments in field operations which are both practical and transparent. INEC must improve its public awareness campaigns, so that the public hears from it, not politicians or political parties, what it is planning or doing. It needs to evaluate all problems which were observed last Saturday, and take steps to correct them. The public needs to continue to support and believe in INEC, but INEC should also accord the concern and worries of the public the attention and respect they deserve.
No comments:
Post a Comment