Fire and brimstone literally framed the build up to the conduct of the off-cycle governorship election in Edo State on Saturday, September 21, 2024. The incumbent governor, Godwin Obaseki, did not help matters. He declared, ominously and reminiscent of former President Olusegun Obasanjo, that the election would be a “do-or-die” affair.
Thanks to the massive deployment of 35,000 police personnel and some other 8,000 security men to secure the conduct of the election, and thanks to the sense of propriety of Edolites, the fire was quenched and the election took place in a relatively placid atmosphere.
Even though a number of disruptions were reported, it is heartwarming that not a single life was lost. It is a replay of the 2020 off-season governorship election in the state. That election was presaged by bellicose rhetoric and violence but it turned out to be tranquil and it set the tone for the subsequent conduct of the peaceful Ondo State off-cycle governorship election of that year.
Thankfully, the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) functioned optimally. Voters were accredited and exercised their franchise in record time. The INEC Election Result Viewing Portal (IReV) worked exceptionally well. As at 8.30pm on Election Day, not less than 93 per cent of Polling Unit (PU) results had been uploaded onto the IReV. Voters showed uncommon resilience. They were not deterred by the rains that fell across the width and breath of the state.
- Subversion of democracy by presidents responsible for coups in W/Africa – Prof Jibrin
- Dangote Refinery will propel Africa out of poverty – Ibn Chambas
If the BVAS and IReV game changed the conduct of the Edo off-cycle governorship election to the delight and relief stakeholders, logistics, a perennial nightmare, reared its ugly head. As at 8.30am on Election Day, only a paltry 41 per cent of the 4,730 PUs across the state had opened.
The media space was inundated with reports of inadequate vehicles to transport stranded ad hoc staff and election materials. This happened in spite of a last minute engagement of the commission with vendors transporting Election Duty officials. This engagement saw the upward review of their tariffs in concert with prevailing petrol prices. In spite of the massive deployment of security personnel, many were not on hand to escort election officials to PUs as required by law.
Voter turnout, perhaps occasioned by the rains and the inflammatory campaigns that preceded the election, defined the process. In spite of the high collection rate of Permanent Voter Cards (PVCs), the turnout was dismal. Out of 2,262,025 registered voters in Edo State, 2,249,780 registered voters, representing 85.57 per cent, collected their PVCs ahead of the election.
By the account of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), only 22.4 per cent of registered voters exercised their franchise. This is a marked decline compared to the off-cycle governorship election of 2020 which saw a turnout of 27 per cent. Vote buying and selling, said to be perpetrated by the two major political parties in the contest, was rampant.
There were acute challenges to the integrity of the election arising from reported and alleged cases of manipulation and deliberate disruptions during Ward and Local Government Collations at Ikpoba/Okha, Egor and Oredo Local Government Areas. Collation of results in these areas was reportedly relocated from designated centres to the INEC State office at Ikpoba, Benin City.
No doubt, this unseemly and strange development, which is contrary to the Electoral Act 2022 and INEC Regulations and Guidelines, has vitiated the successes that the Commission has recorded in this election as well as undermined its integrity and credibility. As a consequence of this, not less than 25 frontline Observer-groups have rejected the results in the aforesaid wards and local government areas.
The position taken by these observer-groups and other stakeholders is understandable. It has been established, and stakeholders are unanimous about it, that collation is the weakest link in our electoral process. During the conduct of elections, hoodlums and thugs, at the behest of desperate politicians determined to manipulate electoral outcomes, attack these collation centres with abandon. This is exemplified by the many collation centres which were recklessly attacked in the course of the 2023 General Elections.
If it is generally agreed by stakeholders that these collation centres are vulnerable, why didn’t the Commission and the security agencies prioritise the reinforcement and fortification of these centres? What was the need to deploy security personnel on a massive scale, as happened in Edo State, only to gloss over or overlook these crucially important centres? Why were party agents, whose remit it is to oversight the collation process on behalf of their parties and candidates, denied access to the INEC state office where these collations took place as opposed to their designated centres in the wards and local government areas?
Given the fact that Ikpoba/Okha and Oredo local government areas have the largest number of registered voters in the state, and therefore hold the potential of determining the outcome of the election, why were their results the last to be collated? Why were their results collated in a surreptitious manner and against extant electoral laws and guidelines? Will the fact that their results were collated in secrecy not raise eyebrows or give room for suspicion?
Arising from these questions, and the fact that they go against the grain of transparency, one of the Commission’s core and touted values, INEC seems to be in the dock. It also appears indicted in the circumstances. As an Election Management Body (EMB), on whose table the buck of elections stops, it owes itself and all stakeholders the responsibility of exculpating itself from this untoward development. It must exonerate itself and demonstrate clearly to all stakeholders that it was not in cahoots with those who allegedly manipulated the Edo State off-cycle governorship election and that it did not subvert the law or its own guidelines.
The only way to do so, in my humble view, is to promptly invoke Section 65 of the Electoral Act 2022 which provides, among others, that:”…the Commission shall have the power within seven days to review the declaration and return where the Commission determines that the said declaration and return was not made voluntarily or was made contrary to the provisions of the law, regulations and guidelines, and manual for the election.”
The ball is in INEC’s court.
Nick Dazang is a former director at the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)
Join Daily Trust WhatsApp Community For Quick Access To News and Happenings Around You.
