Olufunso Olumoko was a career ambassador to Thailand with accreditation to Myanmar. In this interview, Olumoko diagnoses the European Union, EU, mission’s report on Nigeria’s 2023 polls in which President Bola Tinubu, who ran on the platform of the All Progressives Congress (APC), former VP Atiku Abubakar (Peoples Democratic Party, PDP) and Mr Peter Obi (Labour Party) were the main presidential candidates.
The presidential election took place on February 25 after which the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared Tinubu election winner.
As the outcome of the poll was being bitterly contested in court, the EU mission, which observed the election, released its report penultimate week.
The report criticized many aspects of the election, a situation that drew sharp reactions from a section of Nigerians including the Presidency. Excerpts of the Olumoko interview:
What are your thoughts on the EU Report on the 2023 polls?
On reading the Report, I am of the view that the report was not balanced. It puts more emphasis on the negatives such as insecurity, violence, technical failures, vote-buying, etc. The report downplayed the daunting efforts, given the huge challenges to INEC, of conducting elections in 176,000 polling stations over huge, unforgiving terrain with formidable logistical constraints. Yes, there were anomalies but I think the report exaggerated the scale.
Let me be clear, the report from such an important international group is a good input into strengthening our electoral process but it should have been more objective.
What are the implications of such reports for our democracy?
Let’s bear in mind that it is an evolving trend for electoral teams from different countries and organizations to monitor elections in each other’s countries. However, I notice this tendency is more prevalent in the countries of the global south, and I doubt very much if these so-called electoral monitors are deployed often to the countries of the global north whenever they are holding their elections.
Nevertheless, electoral monitors, like those from the EU, the US, the Commonwealth, the AU, ECOWAS, and even our local electoral monitors, serve a useful purpose in strengthening our electoral process and democratic credentials.
They help keep in check, as much as possible, electoral malpractices and malfeasance. Nevertheless, it needs to be stressed that the ultimate authority on Nigeria’s electoral system and process is Nigeria and not any external government or international group!
As an independent nation, should our elections be judged by the international community or by our electoral laws?
As I have earlier expressed, the ultimate arbiter of the Nigerian electoral process is the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), backed by the Nigerian Electoral Act (2022). Foreign monitors best serve as confidence-building measures. Their reports are, at best, advisory and lack any “imprimatur” element.
But do you think reports like those from the EU or AU should be ignored in a bid to better our democracy in Africa?
No, it would be foolhardy and irresponsible to ignore the wholesale reports of international observers. Even the report of the EU contains some useful observations, including sanctity of voting materials and the need for voting to start on time, the need for an effective operational framework for INEC, affirmative action to facilitate the participation of women, the provision of facilities for the disabled, and the need for swift and stern punishment for electoral offences.
All these should be adhered to with a view to making our electoral process more productive and legitimate.
What do you make of the EU’s mission statement that shortcoming in law and electoral administration hindered the conduct of well-run and inclusive elections and damaged trust in INEC?
I disagree with the EU’s report on these aspects. While one may not deny some lapses here and there, they don’t amount to a scale to discredit INEC, hook, line and sinker! Given the huge physical, logistical and technical problems involved in conducting elections in Nigeria, INEC deserved a pass.
In spite of the climate of insecurity, threats and counter-threats by political parties of every hue, the presidential, gubernatorial, national, and state assembly elections were successfully conducted. The elections resulted in the emergence of a president and 16 governors from the ruling party; 10 governors emerged for the opposition PDP, while LP and NNPP secured one gubernatorial seat each. What could be more inclusive than these, moreso, when the opposition LP even won the state where the present president comes from? Like I earlier remarked, the EU report is not objective.
How do you describe the EU mission’s claims that a lack of transparency and operational failures reduced trust in the process and challenged the right to vote?
Again, I do not agree. Most of the EU’s complaints are subjective and are viewed through jaundiced lenses. Thank God, there are judicial procedures put in place and already operational to adjudicate these and other claims by the losing parties.
One other observation I would like to make on this issue is that there’s no perfect electoral system in any part of the world, even from the countries of the monitors.
The US system is fraught with imperfections like voter suppression, in particular of blacks and other minorities, gerrymandering, redistricting, misinformation, conspiracy theories, and outright falsehood, thus generating distrust and hatred among the electorates. Similar scenarios play out in European and UK elections. It is a case of “physician, heal yourself”!
Elections ought to be observed as the festivities of democracy in an ideal state. How can elections in Nigeria be improved?
From going at it and learning from past mistakes, and keeping on improving. I think INEC is currently following that route! Secondly is electoral education. Voters should be educated on the importance of participatory democracy, voting procedures, how to handle ballot papers, and how to vote. Currently, there is an intolerably high incidence of wasted and invalid ballots.
Also, INEC should take advantage of prevailing technological components to enhance its electoral performance.
In the same vein, INEC should ensure that it puts the necessary infrastructure in place to ensure that its technological devices are functional and sustainable, and lastly, INEC should ensure that all electoral offences are prosecuted speedily and culprits dealt with sternly to serve as deterrence.
Credit: Vanguard News Nigeria