EDSIEC and Campaign Finance Regulation
Edo State through its State
Independent Electoral Commission (EDSIEC) is gearing up to conduct elections
into the 192 Wards and 18 Local Government Areas of the state. Six political parties are fielding candidates
at the elections. The poll scheduled to hold on April 20, 2013 is being held in
accordance with the provision of section 7 (1) of the 1999 Constitution, as
amended. The forthcoming poll is guided
by the Edo State Local Government Electoral Law 2012 and EDSIEC Guidelines for
the Local Government Council Elections 2013. Of great importance to this writer
are the political finance provisions in the state law.
Some of the grounds of
disqualification of candidates as contained in section 16 (c) and (e)
respectively are:” failure to produce evidence of tax payments as and when due
for the period of three years immediately preceding the year of the elections” and
inability to pay the non-refundable deposit as prescribed by the Commission. It
was reliably gathered that EDSIEC demands a nomination fee of N100, 000 from
chairmanship candidates and N50, 000 from Councillorship candidates. It is
noteworthy that these candidates would have earlier been charged ‘expression of
interest’ and nomination fees by their respective political parties. Political
finance analysts are of the opinion that much as it is legal and legitimate to
charge these nomination fees (more so in order to weed out unserious
candidates), such fees add to the financial burdens of poor but good candidates
and may therefore be a disincentive for this category of aspirants. It should
be noted that a lot more resources are spent on campaigns during party
primaries as well as the main elections. The whole essence of political finance
regulation is to create a level playing field for all the contestants; however,
attempts should not be made to deny access to genuine and patriotic aspirants
through imposition of prohibitive nomination fees.
In an attempt to ensure that no candidate contesting the poll is given
undue advantage over the other, the Edo State electoral law criminalizes corrupt
practices. It states in section 64 (1) that: “If any corrupt practice is
committed by any candidate elected at an election held under the provisions of
this law, the election of such candidate shall be invalid if the offence is
proved in an electoral tribunal.” Subsection 2 of the aforesaid clause listed
corrupt practices as any of the following: Impersonation; Cheating; Undue
Influence; Bribery; Thuggery; Aiding, abetting, counseling or procuring the
Commission of any of the aforesaid offences and Stealing of ballot boxes. It
would seem this clause sends a strong message to those who may want to subvert
the electoral system; unfortunately however, subsection 3 of that section makes
it difficult for anyone to prove this offence in court or tribunal.
Section 64 (3) states thus: “A corrupt
practice shall be deemed to be committed by a candidate if it is committed with
his knowledge or consent or with the knowledge or consent of a person who is
acting under the specific authority of such candidate with reference to the
election.” Given the smartness of most
politicians, they are wont to deny any knowledge or consent to such misdeed
should any of their foot-soldiers be caught.
Other relevant sections to this discourse are S. 66 to 69. Section 66
criminalizes provision of food, drinks or entertainment for the purpose of
corruptly influencing voters at election. It categorizes that as treating. Section 67 explicitly lay bare what
constitutes ‘undue influence’ while S. 68 comprehensively deals with the issue
of bribery. Section 69 says: “Every person who is guilty of bribery , or undue
influence, or aiding, abetting, counseling or procuring the Commission of any
of those offences, shall be liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding twelve (12) months
or to a fine not less than N100,000. The big question is: Is EDSIEC willing and
ready to enforce these regulations?
Comments
Post a Comment