The
Resident Electoral Commissioner of Cross River State, Mr. Mike Igini,
was part of a team which monitored Kenya’s presidential election. In
this interview with MUDIAGA AFFE, he speaks on his experiences and
sundry issues. Excerpts:
You were part of a team that went to monitor the just concluded Kenyan presidential election. What was your experience?
I would say that it was an interesting
experience, being the first post conflict election; one observed the
collective will and determination of a nation to avoid a repeat of the
tragedy of the 2007 elections. That crisis led to the death of over
1,200 people, like the post-election violence in Nigeria after the 2011
elections. There are still 600,000 displaced people yet to be
rehabilitated five years after the 2007 election in Kenya.
But for the Mobasa separatist
pre-election violence that led to the death of policemen and civilians,
the general impression one got from the Kenyan people was a
determination to put such ugly electoral history behind them. On
election procedure, there were efforts to speed up the process by using
electronic accreditation with standby manual registers of same data as
well as electronic transmission of already counted results from polling
stations. However, because there were some glitches, the Independent
Electoral and Boundary Commission of Kenya had to revert to the manual
processes and all results were brought in from the collation centres to
be counted centrally. A significant difference between the system and
ours was the expeditious zeal with which the judicial system handles
electoral offences.
For instance, a supporter of a Member of
Parliament was found trying to induce voters with money neatly packaged
in envelope during elections on Monday, March 4, and by the next day,
Tuesday, March 5, while the electoral process was still ongoing the
culprit was arraigned before a magistrate court, convicted and sentenced
to three years imprisonment, with no option of fine. One significant
lesson on the use of electronic voting process is that it requires
robust systems with early warning feedback loops that allow instant
remediation of glitches because election processes are highly sensitive
issues which cannot allow for prevarications. Also, there is a need to
always have a manual back-up as we did here in Nigeria because
dispensing with the manual system could be costly if very serious
challenges develop.
Would you say their electoral system is better managed than that of Nigeria?
An electoral system has many contextual
peculiarities so it is often best to talk in relative terms when
comparing. However, there are significant parallels and differences
between our system and theirs. As you may already know the electoral
system relies on many factors from the general country context, the
legislative framework, and the attitude of stakeholders and the rule of
law. ln general, my impression is that the same historical background
of colonialism with voters aggregating around primordial ethnic comfort
zones rather than policy issues, obtains in Kenya as it does in Nigeria.
This is a problem that the Ghanaians had significantly overcome
although there were some remnants of the problems; hence voter awareness
was still a significant problem as with Nigeria. But the Kenyan
electoral system has acknowledged this by introducing the presidential
debate that was focused on issues of development that really matter to
the people and thus educate voters on policy benefits. Another
significant difference in my view is the issue I mentioned earlier
relating to the expeditious consequences for electoral fraud, in the
Kenyan ambiance the judiciary clearly was not ready to brook such threat
to their democratic progress, whereas here we would find judicial
officials vacillating on the same issue which is an existential threat
to our democracy. I say this with all seriousness because until 2010, it
is on record that our judiciary had not done much on conviction of
electoral offenders, and even when INEC made strenuous efforts to push
for such consequences, we met with significant structural resistance to
maintain the status quo ante, except for just one conviction we secured
here in Cross River. This is bad for our progress.
You have been in the forefront
canvassing against corruption in Nigeria, could that be the reason for
the failure in virtually all spheres of government?
Any society that accepts corruption as an
article of faith will never attain its full potential. As I have just
related in regard to electoral offences, a significant stumbling block
to corruption of all kinds in Nigeria is the sense of impunity built by
the years of a lack of effective judicial consequences. No doubt there
have been many convictions for crimes in Nigeria but regarding fraud,
especially the type of fraud which threatens our economic growth and
development in many dimensions, there is a significant deficit in
consequences, and the judiciary should lead the way on that count, that
is why we have separation of powers with the judicial arm and that is
why democracy is always qualified with the mantra “and the rule of law” ,
for as St Augustine insisted, a country is nothing but a gang of rogues
without the rule of law.
How can corruption be addressed?
The way we are going now with our value
pyramid upside down; a society where money is everything, no sense of
shame and nobody afraid of anything except death, we may have to go for
death penalty. Those who do the wrong things that endanger our
collective wellbeing are the very ones that would go to court and boast
their influence and how they will stall trial through frivolous
application upon application. Even in our churhes now, pastors would
annouce during thanksgiving that members should take their personal
effects when dancing to the altar because of stealing even in the house
of God. This is how terrible our society has declined. In addressing
this problem, we should adopt these three approaches in addition to
others. Firstly, and curatively, we should ensure that proven cases of
corruption are met with maximum judicial consequences; second,
preventatively, by ensuring that regulative and normative control
measures in the private and public sectors are in place and effectual.
Regulative controls involve the bureaucratic, financial, quality and
other measures of control that are the organisational practices for
decades and normative controls include the evolving codes of expected
good practices which are reviewed from time to time.
Is it apt that we celebrate 100 years
of amalgamation at a time when the country is faced with issues of
insecurity among other challenges?
It is an apt opportunity to ask ourselves
why we abandoned the path of governace framework Sir Alhmadu Bello,
Awolowo and Zik after series of conferences finally agreed on to promote
rapid development? Why is it that we have refused to reconcile
ourselves and build a country of equal opportunity for all? Our reality
is that after these many years we have not arrived at a consensual
agreement of who we are; what we want to be; and where we want to go. We
are still grappling with the intricacies of nationhood. We have yet to
be at peace with one another after almost 100 years. In other words, we
have not realistically formulated a common acceptable shared vision that
would generate common determination to achieve common goals. Every
group in virtually all parts of the country are making demands on the
nation because truely the Nigeria of the 21st century is quite different
but strangely the idea of national discourse or dialoque has not been
fully embraced. We should confront our realities, accept our mistakes,
correct them and move forward boldly. We can only do that by formulating
an acceptable constitution which meets our consensual acceptance, then
and only then can we truly be celebrating, if we do not have a realistic
and nationally acceptable constitution we will be celebrating a
delusion.
No comments:
Post a Comment