2015: The make or mar year

By YEMI OLAKITAN

This is the year that had caused trepidation to so many Nigerians long before it arrived. 2015. It is the year some experts in the United States of America said Nigeria would break up. It is also a year of the general elections, when President Goodluck Jonathan would have to slug it out with General Muhammadu Buhari and others, to know who becomes President for the next four years. Will Nigeria have peaceful elections come next month? When will the crises spurned by the Boko Haram insurgency end? Senior Correspondent,Yemi Olakitan, takes a look at the fear of violence long tacked to this year.

President Goodluck Jonathan in his New Year message to Nigerians promised to curtail the ‘orgy of violence’ that marked the last general elections held in 2011. He said his government would take decisive action against, ‘anyone who disrupts the public peace, before, during or after the 2015 general elections’.

Shortly after the 2011 general elections, some Nigerians embarked on violence, resulting in the destruction of lives and property. The President swore this will not be allowed to happen in the next elections. The method he hopes to achieve this is not exactly clear since Nigeria has a history entrenched in electoral violence and no new strategies seems to have been put in place.

Six of the seven general elections that were conducted since 1960 were violent, namely 1964/1965, 1979, 1983, 1999, 2003, 2007 and the 2011, although the 2011 election received accolades and was adjudged free and fair. It had its own share of violence. In 2011, the country experienced post-election violence that led to the death of many citizens including National Youth Service Corps members posted to various states.

In states such as Kaduna, the post-election violence left over 4,000 persons displaced and several houses burnt. This prompted the Kaduna State government to disburse N140 million to displaced persons.

Many of the victims of the election violence, including women and children were hacked to death, shot or burnt alive as a result of their ethnic identity or political beliefs. This deadly election-related violence in the North following the April 2011 presidential voting reportedly left more than 800 people dead. The victims were killed in three days of rioting in 12 northern states.

The genesis of this violence began in the 1999 elections which brought General Olusegun Obasanjo (rtd) to power. Most political commentators believed that the 1999 elections were not free and fair. Similarly, observers from the European Union described the 2007 elections, which brought Alhaji Umaru Yar’Adua, a Muslim northern, to power, as among the worst they had witnessed anywhere in the world. Over 300 people were killed in violence linked to the 2007 elections. Following President Yar’Adua’s death in May 2010, Dr Goodluck Jonathan, his Vice, was sworn in as Acting President. An internal zoning agreement within the ruling Peoples Democratic Party provides that a northerner should have held the presidency following the eight-year administration of Chief Obasanjo, a Christian from South-West.

Opposition by some northern leaders did not stop Jonathan. He managed to secure the ruling party’s ticket in the party primaries in January 2011 and went on to sweep the polls in the predominately Christian South during the April ballot. His main opponent, Gen Buhari, the candidate for the Congress for Progressive Change allegedly won the votes in most states of the Muslim North. The election left the country deeply divided and polarised on religious and ethnic lines.

The violence began with widespread protests by supporters of the main opposition candidate, Buhari, who is currently the APC presidential flag bearer. Following the reelection of the incumbent, Jonathan, a Christian from the Niger Delta, who was the candidate of the ruling PDP, the supporters of Gen Buhari ensured that the protests degenerated into violent riots or sectarian killings in the northern states of Adamawa, Bauchi, Borno, Gombe, Jigawa, Kaduna, Kano, Katsina, Niger, Sokoto, Yobe and Zamfara.

According to reports, the elections that brought President Jonathan to power was among the bloodiest in Nigeria’s electoral history. As election results trickled in on April 17, and it became clear that Buhari had lost, his supporters took to the streets in northern towns and cities to protest what they alleged to be the rigging of the polls.

The protesters started burning tyres, and the dissent soon turned into riots. The rioting quickly degenerated into sectarian and ethnic bloodletting across the northern states. Muslim rioters targeted and killed Christians and members of ethnic groups from the southern states, who were perceived to have supported the ruling party, burning their churches, shops, and homes. The rioters also attacked police stations, ruling party and electoral commission offices. In predominantly Christian communities in Kaduna State, mobs of Christians retaliated by killing Muslims and burning their mosques and property.

According to the Christian Association of Nigeria, CAN, at least 170 Christians were killed in the post-election riots; hundreds more were injured, and thousands displaced. More than 350 churches were burnt or destroyed by the Muslim rioters across 10 northern states. Also, in the Christian towns and villages of southern Kaduna State, including Zonkwa, Matsirga, and Kafanchan, sectarian clashes left more than 500 dead.

In northern Kaduna State, at least 180 people, and possibly more, were killed in the cities of Kaduna, Zaria and their surrounding suburbs. According to media reports, dozens of people were also killed during riots in the other northern states.

In many of the northern towns and cities, Christians found refuge in police stations and military barracks. In southern Kaduna, Muslim women and children flocked to police stations for safety. The police successfully protected people in many cases, but they were largely ineffective at controlling the rioting and violence in other places, According to various reports, both the police and the military were implicated in the excessive use of force and other serious abuses while responding to the rioting and sectarian violence.

President Jonathan in response appointed a new 22-member panel to investigate the causes and extent of the election violence. More than 500 people were arrested and charged following the post-election violence. However, the police and state prosecutors have rarely followed through with criminal investigations and effective prosecution in such matters. Past commissions of enquiry had failed to bring culprits to book.
Nigeria’s electoral violence dated back to as early as 1964-65 elections in the then Western Region, referred to as the “wild, wild West”. The electoral problems tagged, ‘operation wetie’ culminated in the first military coup in the country. The 1964 elections held in December were inconclusive as the United Progressives Grand Alliance (UPGA) boycotted them, but supplementary elections were held in March, 1965 in some areas in Eastern Region and Lagos. In the defunct Western Region, the NNDP won 88 seats out of 98, but Alhaji D.S. Adegbenro of the opposition UPGA proclaimed himself Premier of Western Region and appointed eight ministers. Subsequently, Chief S.L. Akintola was sworn in as the premier while Alhaji Adegbenro was arrested. There were violent demonstrations leading to the deaths of about 1,000 people and the burning down of about 5,000 houses in the infamous ‘operation wetee’ a Yoruba parlance which means douse with petrol and set it ablaze!

The dispute that trailed the 1964-65 elections snowballed into the 1966 military coup which sacked the government of Prime Minister, Sir Tafawa Balewa. It also led to three years civil war that came to an end in January 1970. The 1979 elections were not devoid of disputation and acrimony as regard the mathematical riddle of 2/3 of 19 (states) in which the National Party of Nigeria (NP) formula of 12 2/3 was accepted and Alhaji Shehu Shagari was declared winner. Again, the 1983 elections brought some shocks to the spines of most Nigerians, especially in the old Ondo State where the defunct Federal Electoral Commission (FEDECO) attempted to falsify the results in favour of Chief Akin Omoboriowo, the candidate of the NPN as against Chief Adekunle Ajasin, the preferred candidate of the Unity Party (UPN) that won the election.

The 1993 presidential election which was won by Chief M.K.O. Abiola was annulled by President Ibrahim Babangida. This threw the country into turmoil. The 2011 general elections adjudged to be free and fair ever in the country were also visited by violence in some parts of the North. The violence that followed those elections still persists till date. The post electoral violence that characterised the 2011 Presidential Election clearly reverberated the challenges of violence in the country and the need to devise ways of eliminating them.

In the New Year, 2015, President Jonathan in his speech tried to proffer solutions to the problem. He advised politicians to put the nation’s interest above self, noting that their ambitions were not worth the blood of any Nigerian. He said, ‘‘improvement of the lives and living conditions of the people should be the driver of any quest for political power and leadership positions. Let us not promote sectionalism, disunity, intolerance, hate, falsehood or the malicious abuse of political opponents. Let us all conduct our electoral campaigns with the highest possible decorum and civility toward political opponents. Let us give the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) the fullest possible support and cooperation it requires to conduct credible and violence-free elections in 2015.”

The President said his administration would continue to empower all key stakeholders such as INEC, security agencies and the electorate to improve on the electoral process.

“We will continue to provide adequate funding to INEC and maintain the commission’s independence and isolate it from any form of interference or meddling in its day-to-day affairs,” he assured.

Jonathan pledged to give security agencies all they need to conduct violence-free elections, National security agencies, he added, will also be given all necessary support to enhance their ability to ensure that the elections are peaceful and violence-free.

“The Nigeria Police have already established an Elections Security Planning and Monitoring Unit. I am optimistic that with the cooperation of all law-abiding citizens of the country, our commitment to have a peaceful and violence-free election will be actualised,” he said.

However, a coalition of civil society groups in Abuja said, non-implementation of election committees’ reports and impunity has encouraged electoral violence in the country. They said that if past committee reports on the prevention of electoral violence were fully implemented by government, the tension ahead of the 2015 general elections would be reduced.

The civil society groups noted that aside from lack of implementation of past committee reports contributing to recurrence of electoral violence, lack of punishment for perpetrators of electoral violence in the past is also a huge challenge to peaceful elections. The activists said that there’s need to meet candidates of prominent political parties before the polls.

Sunday Mirror investigations reveal that the Chairman of INEC, Professor Atahiru Jega, had on several occasions raised concern over conducts of politicians as a threat to peaceful elections. He said many politicians are fond of making comments that may not promote peaceful elections. Efforts to reduce tension and violence during the February elections had made Professor Jega to meet with stakeholders in December 2014. During those meetings, he raised his concern over the conduct of politicians and its implication on the elections in February.

The All Progressives Congress, APC, on its part, called for dialogue between the party and the PDP, to discuss ways in which election and post-election violence could be averted. According to a statement released by its National Publicity Secretary, Lai Mohammed, the party said it had taken steps, as far back as May 2014, to work with the PDP to ensure violence-free polls in 2015.

The party said: “Even with the little time left for the elections to hold, we strongly believe that a meeting of the leadership of the two political parties, the APC and the PDP, will send a powerful message to our compatriots and, indeed, the international community and douse the tension ahead of the election.

“A meeting of the representatives of both parties was held in Washington, United States on April 7-8, 2014. It was agreed that a joint meeting of both parties be convened to discuss and agree on the issue of a code of conduct for the campaigns and the elections, we wrote a letter to the PDP suggesting a bipartisan meeting to address the issue.

“The PDP agreed to the proposal and suggested that it should be expanded to include the leadership of other political parties in the country. However, the meeting did not hold,” Mohammed said.

The APC assured Nigerians that there would be no violence on its part, saying it had instructed its members nationwide to shy away from violence during the election.

“We have heard from Nigerians who are so afraid about possible violence during the forthcoming elections that they are even willing to relocate to other countries until after the elections. But, as the biggest opposition party in Nigeria and a major stakeholder in our nation’s democracy, we are assuring, on our part, that there will be no violence,” APC sasid.

Furthermore, the party implored the Federal Government to take necessary measures to ensure that the elections are free and fair, stating that rigging brings in anger and violence. The APC added that it would accept the results of the elections if they are free and fair.

National Chairman of the PDP, Adamu Mu’azu, on his part, while speaking on the subject asked Nigerians to eschew violence as the general elections approach so as to show the world that its democracy has come of age over the last 15 years. He stated this in a New Year message to Nigerians. Mu’azu urged the citizens to pray for peaceful polls in 2015.

According to reports, about 15 states are considered the highest security risks during the forthcoming elections. They are Nasarawa, Plateau, Benue, Borno, Yobe, Adamawa, Taraba, Kaduna, Zamfara, Rivers, Ebonyi, Enugu, Imo, Ekiti and Osun states.

Three of these states – Adamawa, Borno, and Yobe – are already under emergency rule owing to the activities of the terrorist sect, Boko Haram.

Plateau, Benue, Nasarawa, Kaduna, and Zamfara have witnessed killings of hundreds of people by unidentified armed men, and through communal and ethno-religious violence.

The history of violence, degree of control by incumbents and relationship with the Federal Government, stability of internal state party politics, existence of terrorists and militants, as well as communal and religious conflicts are indicators that these states might be violent during or after the elections. Others include zoning arrangement, bid for second term by the incumbent governors, and jostle for federal and state legislative positions. The proliferations of arms and increased activities by armed groups are major risk factors towards the 2015 elections in these states.

The 1999 Constitution made adequate provisions for the prosecution of the perpetrators of electoral violence; it prohibits the formation of quasi-military organisations for political purposes. Section 227 of the Constitution states: “No association shall retain, organise, train or equip any person or group of persons for the purpose of enabling them to be employed for the use of display of physical force or coercion in promoting any political objective or interest or in any such manner as arouse reasonable apprehension that they are organised and trained or equipped for that purpose”

Section 81 of the Electoral Act 2010 prescribes punishment for contravention of section 227 of the Constitution. It provides that any political party or association that contravenes the provision of section 227 of the Constitution commits an offence and is liable on conviction to: (a) N500, 000 for the first offence; (b) N700, 000 for any subsequent offence; (c) N50, 000 for every day the offence continues.

The Act further provides that any person who aids or abets a political party in contravening section 227 of the Constitution, commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine of N500,000 or imprisonment for a term of three years or both.

Apart from the provisions of the Constitution, the Electoral Act, 2010 has provisions specifically aimed at stemming electoral violence. Although categorised as “electoral offences” the provisions are as follows: (i) Section 94 – Conduct of political rallies and processions; (ii) Section 95 – Prohibition of certain conducts etc of political campaigns; (iii) Section 96 – Prohibition of use of force or violence at political campaigns; (iv) Section 119 – Disorderly behaviour at political meetings; (v) Section 128 – Disorderly conduct at Election Day; (vi) Section 129 – Offences on Election Day and (vii) Section 131. The Electoral Act provides appropriate sanctions for contravention of the law.

Sunday Mirror investigations reveal that the constitutional provisions and the provisions of the Electoral Act leave no one in doubt as to the adequacy of the legal framework for combating electoral violence.

According to Barrister Muniru Shittu, what appears to be the problem is the enforcement of the law.‘‘The problem has never been the inadequacy of the law to tackle challenges; but the inability of institutions to enforce the law.”

According to investigations, the power to prosecute electoral offences is vested in INEC. Section 150(2) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) states that: “A prosecution under this Act shall be undertaken by legal officers of the Commission or any legal practitioners appointed by it”

Critics have pointed to the dearth of legal officers in INEC and the fact that a plethora of legal practitioners are already appointed by INEC for purposes of defending the Commission before the various election tribunals, it does appear that the Commission is understaff to effectively prosecute electoral offences.

It was argued that the delay in grappling with the problem associated with the prosecution of electoral offences is responsible for the perceived indifference on the part of the appropriate authority in prosecuting electoral violence arising from the 2011 elections.

Investigations by Sunday Mirror reveal that despite Government’s commitment to prosecute those involved in electoral violence in the past may repeat itself.

It has been advocated that the nation must establish Electoral Offences Commission. The Uwais’ Panel on Electoral Reforms made a recommendation to this effect which was accepted by Government. Nevertheless, the legislative proposal was not passed into law. In a chat with a journalist and social critic, Chief Bayo Ogunmupe, an Electoral Offences Commission along the lines suggested in the Uwais’ Panel Report on Electoral Reforms is a body solely established to prosecute electoral offences. This will be more effective so that INEC may focus on organising elections. INEC seems to be overburdened with issues relating to the conduct of elections. as the idea of prosecuting suspects or accused persons is a distraction.

INEC under Jega significantly improved the conduct of the elections, creating a new voter register, improving transparency in reporting results, and publicly pledging to hold accountable those who broke the rules.

Over the years, the federal and state governments had set up various committees and commissions of enquiry to investigate outbreaks of violence, but the reports from these bodies, and the occasional government white paper, have mostly been shelved. In the absence of accountability and effective redress, communities that have suffered violence frequently resort to vigilante justice and exact revenge by inflicting commensurate harm on members of other communities.

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) says it has put a number of measures in place to ensure sterling performance in the forth-coming 2015 general election, Attahiru Jega, the Commission’s chairman, pledged that INEC would provide a level-playing field for all the political parties to reduce frustrations that could snowball into violence.

Jega, said: “The principle underlining our preparations for the 2015 general elections is to consolidate the gains of the 2011 general elections and to prevent the recurrence of the weakness.”

The Commission’s boss said: “A strategic plan (2012-2016), with detailed strategic programme of action has been formulated and is being implemented; a detailed election project plan is being implemented to ensure seamless execution of specific tasks leading to the 2015 general election; a comprehensive reorganization and restructuring of the commission has been completed, drawing from recommendations of a highly rated consulting firm; the consolidation and de-duplication of the biometric register of voters has been completed, as a result of which the register of voters now has tremendous integrity- much better than the one with which the 2011 elections were conducted; we have rolled out the first phase of the continuous voter registration (CVR) nationwide. The second phase commenced on the 21st August and ended on the 25th August 2014.”

The former university don said INEC has not been sleeping in this respect, but had taken steps to nip the menace of violence in the bud.

According to him, some of the measures include: “compilation of an authentic voter’s register with the voter’s biometrics; transparency in the policies and engagements of the Commission aimed to eliminate citizens’ suspicions, speculations and tension that may lead to electoral violence; massive voter education programme to increase citizens’ awareness of the electoral process; inauguration of national inter-agency advisory committee on voter education and publicity which has been replicated at the state, and local government levels; improvement of security through partnership with security agencies at all levels; introduction of the re-modified open ballot system in the elections to further enhance transparency in voting aimed to remove doubts in the minds of the electorate, and introduction of alternative dispute-resolution with the view to reducing rancor amongst the political class.”

Ralph Akinfeleye, a professor in the Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Lagos, said that electoral violence would be a thing of the past when all stakeholders in the political process begin to respect the rule of law.

The Commandant-General of the Nigerian Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC), Ade Abolurin in his part identified what he described as ineffectiveness of the Nigeria Police for electoral violence in Nigeria.

Abolurin, lampooned the police for unresolved cases of electoral killings since 2003.

The NSCDC boss explained that the failure from the police seems to be creating a culture of impunity and motivation for recurrence of the crime.

He lamented that the penalties for acts associated with electoral violence like assault and arson were weak.

The NSCDC boss, who canvassed a decentralized police system, was also of the opinion that police alleged failure gives room for recurrence of the crime in the society.

“The police have been unable to get to the root of these killings. This failure seems to be creating a culture of impunity and motivation for recurrence of the crime, “he said. In the words of Chief Bayode Ogunmupe, ‘only time will tell whether Nigerians have leant their lessons on the evils of electoral violence.’ According to him, we simply have to wait and see. Speaking further , he said, the attendant benefits of political office and the paraphernalia of wealth that accrues to political office holders will continue to make politics a do or die affair unless urgent actions or mechanisms are put in place to stem the tide,” he said.