INEC deregistration of 74 parties: Matters arising
Last Thursday,
the Independent National Electoral Commission wielded the big stick by
deregistering 74 political parties in one fell swoop. This is unprecedented and
not a few Nigerians are happy with INEC’s decision with many commentators even
asking that the number be further pruned down to a maximum of five. What those
calling for further reduction do not know or fail to understand is that the
electoral management body did not just reduce the number by fiat. The exercise
was not arbitrarily brought down but based on certain constitutional and
Electoral Act provisions.
Since INEC took
that decision, I have been on several media platforms to discuss the
development. I was on Independent Television, Nigeria Info 95.1 FM Abuja, Love
104.5 FM Abuja and had a telephone interview to West Africa Democracy Radio,
Senegal on the issue.
I foresaw last
Thursday’s political development and wrote my thoughts on it on this page in an
April 3, 2019 article entitled, “Should INEC deregister non-performing
political parties?”. As of that time when INEC was wrapping up on the conduct
of the 2019 elections, many public commentators were already asking it to
deregister the political parties believed to be liabilities rather than assets
to the country’s electoral process. Many political watchers believed that most
of the political parties did not add any value to the country’s democratic
consolidation agenda but rather posed a threat to it.
Among the
arguments put forward then was the fact that most of the 91 political parties
that fielded over 23,000 candidates in the last general election were quite
unserious as they did not campaign but were largely interested in the free
publicity being given by the media and the civil society particularly during
the organised political debates and voter education programmes. Many chieftains
of the political parties divided their ranks by forming themselves into
coalitions such as Coalition of United Political Parties and were busy
endorsing candidates of the dominant political parties.
For instance,
in December 2018, it was widely reported that 45 opposition parties under the
CUPP adopted the Peoples Democratic Party candidate, Atiku Abubakar, as their
consensus candidate for the 2019 presidential election. To expose the treachery
in this dubious endorsement, we still had 73 presidential candidates contesting
the February 23, 2019 presidential election. How come? Two days to the
presidential election when all sensitive and non-sensitive electoral materials
including ballot papers and results sheets had been printed and distributed
nationwide, 12 presidential candidates of other political parties reportedly
endorsed Muhammadu Buhari, according to a statement by the presidential
spokesman, Femi Adesina. Did these candidates and their political parties read
the Electoral Act on the condition for withdrawal from electoral contest?
According to
Section 35 of the Electoral Act 2010, as amended, “A candidate may withdraw his
candidature by notice in writing signed by him and delivered by himself to the
political party that nominated him for the election and the political party
shall convey such withdrawal to the Commission and which shall only be allowed
not later than 45 days to the election”. This is the law but we had those
pretenders calling themselves contenders withdrawing from a presidential race
48 hours to the election!
To also
underscore the un-seriousness of these political parties, some of them do not
understand the country’s electoral law. During the last elections, a few of
them fielded underage candidates. However, due to the provisions of Section 31
(1) of the Electoral Act 2010, as amended which ousted INEC power to reject
party candidates, the unqualified candidates were allowed to run in the
election. Quite unfortunately, that impunity continued and INEC had to wield
the big stick in September 2019 when, ahead of the November 16 governorship
election, it disqualified 14 underage candidates (six in Bayelsa and eight in
Kogi State). Though some courts ruled INEC out of order for exercising the
administrative power to disqualify candidates saying that the commission should
have approached the court to do so for it, it is saddening that a presumed
national political party will not be abreast of the electoral law under which
it hopes to sponsor candidates for elections.
In many of the
political parties in Nigeria, whether the 74 that were deregistered or 18 that
survived the axe, it is heart-rending that internal party democracy is observed
in the breach. Imposition of candidates is the norm among our political
parties. In fact, I learnt from credible sources that some of the political
parties were only established for mercantilist purposes rather than to broaden
the democratic space and hold the ruling party to account. Not a few believed
that the endorsements fad in the lead up to election were procured by the
candidates and political parties who can afford it.
It is an open
secret that though Nigeria is a de jure multiparty country, it is a de facto
two-party state. The two dominant political parties are the All Progressives
Congress and the PDP. I have heard said that these two dominant political
parties actually gave birth to proxy political parties whom they could use to
serve certain political interest during the electioneering period. For
instance, it is believed that some of the political parties were established to
stave off prospect of a total boycott of elections by the opposition political
parties.
Other real
reasons promoters of some political parties established them were to reap
financially from post-primary crises that usually engulf the dominant political
parties. Thus, these opposition political parties make their party platforms
available to aggrieved contestants from the major parties. For usually
undisclosed fees, these platforms are made available to any desperate
candidates willing to contest election. That is why it is easy to see a member
of a dominant political party getting a platform to contest election even if it
is a day to the deadline for submission of party candidates.
These political
parties also reap bountifully in the event of inadvertent errors on their list
of nominees by INEC. For instance, should there be an omission in listing their
candidate on the ballot paper, they quickly rush to election tribunal to plead
unlawful exclusion from the election. There have been instances when a
well-conducted election gets annulled on the basis of lawful nomination and
unlawful exclusion by INEC. When that kind of scenario plays out, the winner of
that election is quick to go and negotiate behind the scene to have the party
contesting their victory to withdraw case filed at the election petitions
tribunal.
My versed
knowledge of Nigerian politics and elections may have afforded me an
opportunity to see beyond the electoral laws; however, INEC did not base its
action of February 6 on these aforementioned extenuating factors. According to
its chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, the parties were deregistered for their
inability to fulfil requirements for existence based on Section 225A of the
1999 Constitution (as amended). That section empowers INEC to deregister
political parties found guilty of breach of any of the requirements for
registration as a political party as well as failure to win at least 25 per
cent of the votes cast in one state of the federation in a presidential
election or 25 per cent of the votes cast in one local government area of a
state in a governorship election; and failure to win at least one ward in a
chairmanship election, one seat in the national or state assembly election or
one seat in a councillorship election.
Recall that
between 2011 and 2013, INEC under Prof. Attahiru Jega had deregistered a total
of 39 political parties based on the provisions of Section 78 (7) (I and ii).
However, several of the affected parties challenged the power of INEC to
deregister them, particularly on the grounds that the Electoral Act is inferior
to the constitution. Even now, many of the affected political parties have
threatened to drag INEC to court to reverse itself based on the fact that it
acted hastily without allowing all local government elections to be conducted
by the State Independent Electoral Commissions to be concluded. It remains to
be seen if the courts will agree with them.
On several
occasions, I have been asked if deregistration of political parties is the
panacea we need as a country to sanitise our electoral process and my answer is
NO. The lasting solution is to make the criteria for party registration more
stringent rather than making them very liberal as it is at present. Secondly,
instead of deregistering political parties, why don’t we allow them exist in
perpetuity and set a very stringent criteria for political parties to be put on
ballot papers at elections? Criteria such as membership strength, national
spread, financial resources and adherence to constitutionalism or internal
party democracy can be the conditions precedent for a party to nominate
candidates to be on the ballot paper.
Comments
Post a Comment