INEC and The Regulation Of Political Of Political Parties

By

Dr Abayomi Ferreira

abayomiferreira@hotmail.co.uk

The appointment and acceptance to the office of Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission of Professor Maurice Iwu is probably a convenient point in contemporary affairs to discuss certain essential matters of public and political significance in which the INEC, as the regulator of political practice in Nigeria is relevant. I was further encouraged to write this paper, when I read from the online edition of the ‘ Daily Independent’ of 27 June 2005 that the new Chairman openly called for the “ opening up of the political space.” The ruling politicians who are all members of the three ruling political parties, PDP, ANPP and AD, for reasons that have been obvious since the advent of the present constitutional polity, are not interested in the desirable project of “opening up the political space.” Historically, they are the direct political descendants of the political practitioners, who by the character and na ture of their politicking and practice rapidly drove Nigeria into the present national impasse whereby the polity is incapable of mobilising the people to generating rapid economic development for the improvement of the quality of life and the standard of living of our people. In appearance, these politicians are in three different political parties, but in essence they are of identical political orientation. That is precisely the reason why many find it very easy and normal to cross from one party to the other, without batting an eye and as if the carpet-crosser was merely moving from his bedroom into the living room. They prefer the status quo of restricted space for political practice thereby retaining to them the monopoly of political power. In spite of the prolonged military dictatorship and its adverse consequences on the affairs of our country, this brand of politicians have held sway in Nigerian politics over the past 55 years, i.e., since 1950 when political contest  for power in its present form came globally throughout the country onto the scene in Nigeria. Electorally, at least in the present post-military dispensation, the majority of the people have demonstrated repeatedly that they prefer an open political space where all ideas, concepts and programmes would be in an open contest for power. For example, at the 1999 presidential elections, only 14 million Nigerians voted, with the winner scoring 8 million votes and the loser having 6 million votes. There were 48 million names on the electoral register. That left 34 million persons who did not exercise their right to vote in spite of the frustration they exhibited for the failed military dictatorship and the concomitant desire and support for constitutional government. Similarly, at the 2003 presidential elections, only 39.9 million out of a     total of 60.8 million registered voters expressed their preferences for an elected President. We have tried to find out the cause of the ot herwise inexplicable apathy, and we now that the people have little faith in the restricted polity. This declared apathy was confirmed by an opinion poll that was published in ‘The Guardian’ of August 4, 2003 which showed that only 24% of those polled expressed any confidence in the newly elected government that was installed only two months earlier.

Neglected Constitutional Instruments for opening up the Polity

In spite of the inherent limitations that characterise the 1999 Constitution particularly with regard to its origin, craftsmanship and impostor birthmark that constitution provides certain instruments that the INEC and the National Assembly are expected to apply in ‘opening up the political space.’ We will discuss these provisions of the constitution, which have been blatantly ignored and neglected by the two organs of government in the past six years.

Firstly, Section 228 (c) of the 1999 Constitution provides “for an annual grant to the Independent National Electoral Commission for disbursement to political parties on a fair and equitable basis to assist them in the discharge of their functions.” The outgoing military government that fashioned the 1999 Constitution ignored the provision in its INEC Decree No 17. The  politicians of the three ruling political parties in the National Assembly have also consistently ignored this provision in the subsequent Electoral Acts which were promulgated in 2001 and 2002 respectively. This provision is very important “to open up the political space” because the three ruling political parties, directly and indirectly, are able to fund their party activities through the direct access and hold which they have on the public finances of the country. Since, by the Constitution, a political party in Nigeria is not a private enterprise, the implementation  of this provision of the Constitution will certainly go a long way to “open up the political space”, in that, all political parties will be placed in a position to “discharge their functions.”

At the 2003 General Elections when the Democratic Alternative came onto the arena of electoral contest, some funds were disbursed to all the thirty political parties to enable them participate in the elections. Ever since, no further disbursement of funds has been made. Certainly, members of the INEC are expected to be aware that the functions and activities of a political party go much beyond fielding candidates for elections. A political party is a continuing enterprise whose functions and activities include, among others:

1        Maintaining secretariats across the land with personnel who have to be paid salaries and wages

2        Building up and maintaining a library

3        Running committees to formulate and develop policies for national governance and programme for development

4        Disseminating its policies for governance and programme for development among the population through the regular print and electronic media and through pamphlets, leaflets and monograms

5        Dissemination of counter-information on the activities, policies and programmes of other political parties, in particular those parties that are in power

6        Running of newspapers to emphasise to the people its ideological position on the national political spectrum

7        Daily holding of meetings at various levels of organisation throughout the country

8        Recruitment of new members and maintenance of its membership in terms of information and direction

9        Political education of members at all levels; indeed, a serious political party in a country as ours will establish a party school for the quality development of its members

10    Administration of its finances including subscriptions and grants at all levels

11    Fielding of candidates for elections with the objective of winning power to implement its policies and programmes for the benefits of the people

Certainly, these are continuing activities, except the last on the list, i.e. fielding of election candidates which indeed requires continuing planning and the outcome of which is dependent on the efficiency with which the all the other listed functions and activities are implemented. The 1999 Constitution recognises the continuity character of these functions and activities, hence the provision in Section 228(c), which the politicians of the three ruling parties in the National Assembly and INEC have chosen to ignore.

       Secondly, the same provision of the Constitution utilised in its context the phrase, “fair and equitable basis.” In 2003, when the Democratic Alternative was an active contestant for power at the elections, INEC distributed funds to the thirty political parties in two phases. It made equal disbursements to the political parties just before the elections and distributed a pro rata sharing on the basis of comparative results of seats won after the elections. The words, “equitable” and “fair” are interchangeable and each word means “just”, using the “principles of justice.” Neither of these two words means “pro rata”, a phrase, which in the English lexicon means “in proportion”. The intrpretation, which INEC applied in its implementation of the little bit of the constitutional provision for an open political space that it decided to i mplement at the 2003 General Elections is not fair, not equitable and not just. As we have shown above, the activities of a political party go beyond the fielding of candidates for elections. In any case, the provision of the constitution on funding of political parties refers to “discharge of their functions” and not fielding candidates for elections or winning seats at elections. A fair and equitable distribution of public funds to political parties for their activities must be equal to all, the political parties to be “fair” and “equitable”. It must also be annual and it must be regular. Otherwise, INEC is aiding the perpetuation of the ruling political parties in power and refusing to “open up the political space.”

    Thirdly, Section 221 of the 1999 Constitution states, “No association, other than a political party, shall canvass for votes for any candidate at any election, or contribute to the funds of any candidate at an election.” In the 2003 General Elections in which the Democratic Alternative participated, virtually all the candidates who eventually became winners openly breached this provision of the Constitution. All the candidates who were in elected executive offices, i. e president and governors throughout the land collected ‘contributions’ from all and sundry including captains of industry, permanent secretaries and other public servants on the public payroll. Many of the contributions were published as amounting to billions of naira and they are from sources that are not any of the thirty political parties including their own parties. Although the purpose of this paper is very specific and will be sent to Professor Maurice Iwu, the new ch airman of INEC as a suggestion on how, in our present restricted circumstance, the political space can be truly opened up, it is germane to the health of the Nigerian polity that these breaches of the constitution lead directly to one of the big causes of corruption in Nigerian public life. The point that is relevant here, however, is that to the open knowledge of INEC, the many candidates of the three ruling political parties, by breaching this constitutional provision closed out others from taking effective part in the electoral process. It is hoped that the new chairman and his commissioners will regulate political party and politicians henceforth with their eyes not turned away from such activities, if indeed we have “to open up the political space.”

The Supreme Court opened up the political space a bit

    In March 2003, the Supreme Court of Nigeria made a gigantic contribution to opening up the political space by its landmark judgement that made INEC to register 27 other political parties in addition to the three ruling political parties. Although, INEC immediately concurred with the Supreme Court judgement, by its further activities and inactivity, it has continued to carry out its regulatory activities as if its hands and mind remain tied up by the politicians of the three ruling political parties. The new Chairman needs to untie INEC and proceed to open up the political space. The economic development of Nigeria can only be derived from a political practice system that is open and sustained on a free contest of ideas and programmes. The present closed system whereby three political parties of the same character monopolise the political space is neither to the interest of development nor of our people. I hope Professor Maurice Iwu will follow his public pronouncement for an “open political space” with concrete action. The 1999 Constitution provides some approaches for him. They have been there since 1999, but were ignored. He should not ignore them. What exists today in Nigeria is cosmetic democracy in a restricted polity, which sustains the three ruling political parties.

 

 

Dr Abayomi Ferreira

Kent, United Kingdom

29 June 2005