INEC, PVC, CVR and the 2015 elections BY ADEYINKA JEJE I have followed with interest the on-going national discourse on INEC, the distribution of Permanent Voter Cards (PVC) and the Continuous Voter Registration (CVR) exercise. I have restrained myself from making comments by virtue of my office, but l am finding it difficult to defend my position of silence in the face of what appears as a deliberate effort by INEC to frustrate the 2015 general elections. My change of position is also due to the fact that I am an Election Manager in Lagos State and constitutionally, whatever is the final product of the voters register by INEC will also affect the performance on my job, hence, I am constitutionally permitted to shout loud and clear where l notice any shortcoming in the process. Moreover, l am a Nigerian and privileged to have full understanding of the electoral terrain, hence l owe the nation, posterity and myself the duty to analyse the situation as an insider and let Nigerians know and understand the unfolding scenario. It will be recalled that the Temporary Voter Cards (TVCs) were issued by INEC on registration for the 2011 general elections. INEC informed all of us that those with double registration had their names deleted as at 2011 and even threatened then to prosecute those affected by double registration. The PVC being distributed now had the 2011 voters register as its data base. INEC equally informed us in 2011 that it was in the process of issuing the PVCs. In essence, it took INEC four years to produce the PVCs purportedly to be used for the 2015 general elections. One would have expected a perfect and seamless job, not the haphazard issuance, missing of individual names and entire registration units all over the country. First, let us examine the issue of double registration. While INEC has the right to perfect its voter register, l have checked the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Electoral Act, l did not see anywhere INEC is empowered to disenfranchise anybody for double registration. I think the most logical thing to do is to delete double but still maintain the voter in the register. INEC could decide to prosecute anyone for double registration but for God’s sake, it has no right to disenfranchise anybody. Secondly, INEC has not convincingly explained why voters in some states decreased while obviously these are states with exploding population. Is INEC saying after the 2011 general elections it did another editing of the register or it employed another computer application that assisted in weeding out names with double entry? I know this was not the case, hence, there is something mischievous or hidden from the public, and the election managers in the 36 states Independent Electoral Commissions (SIECs), who will equally use the same register for their local government elections are not being carried along by INEC. The compilation of the voters register is a very important aspect of the electoral process. Thirdly, is the distribution of the PVCs for three days and relegation of subsequent collection to INEC Local Council Offices, which is a reckless management of the distribution without adequate consideration for the environment. All of us who witnessed the distribution were sure that not up to 30 percent collected the PVCs. I was therefore shocked when INEC claimed that over 60 percent of registered voters had collected the PVCs and that any registered voter without the PVC will not be allowed to vote in the 2015 general elections. This seemingly simple unconstitutional decision by INEC is a recipe for disaster in the forthcoming election, hence INEC needs to be called to order before it is too late. The voters register is biometric in the sense that it has the picture, details and fingerprints of each voter. It is easy to relate the photograph in the register to the face of the voter and one could ask some simple security questions like age, date of birth, etc, to ascertain doubtful voters. To outrightly ban those who could not locate/ collect their PVC is nothing but arbitrary use of power. If this situation is not corrected by calling INEC to order, the ground or foundation is being laid for altercations at each of virtually all the polling units across the country. On the day of election, it is easy for altercation to get heated and if not well managed, could lead to squabbles which may ultimately lead to chaos, riots and a breakdown of law and order. I foresee this happening simultaneously all over the country and this will simply lead to cancellation of elections in those areas where peace appears to have been disturbed. I have read voraciously about electoral processes and luckily l was in Washington DC, USA with Prof Attahiru Jega and his team during the 2011 presidential elections. One constant in stable electoral environments all over the world is confidence in the system. No voter ever expects to be disenfranchised and voters in those climes know that anyone who commits an electoral offence shall be liable. The simple question l want to ask is: “Has INEC’s distribution of the PVCs generated confidence in the Nigeria electoral system towards the 2015 elections?” I can still recollect that after the 2011 elections, Prof Jega announced that INEC would start the CVR immediately all over the federation. I find the whole gamut of CVR as a huge joke on Nigerians. Why five days if it is Continuous Voter registration? Is it not contradictory? We all can remember the problem of the data capturing machines when used in 2011 and we begin to wonder what magic INEC wanted to perform within five days of what it called CVR exercise. Of course, this is not the age of miracles, the exercise has failed woefully. It is true INEC has a monopoly on the compilation of voters register but the Constitution also empowers SIECs to advise INEC on the subjects as long as the same register would be used for local councils’ elections. This implies SIECs are stakeholders, but INEC did not consider it necessary to carry the SIECs along and, to worsen the matter, has refused to acknowledge inputs from SIECs. INEC is on a solitary journey in the Nigeria electoral terrain whereas it is expected to carry all the stakeholders along.. It is quite clear from the analysis that if INEC is not called to order, it will embark on unconstitutional disenfranchisement of eligible voters. INEC has no right to delete any name from the voters register but can only prosecute those involved in double registration. What happens to the names of individuals missing in the register or to names of people in an entire registration unit missing? Many people re-registered but still had no PVC. Yet many of these people have the temporary voter card but according to INEC, cannot vote. The main thrust of this epistle is: what will happen on election day? Are we using the card reader? What value is the card reader going to add to the election? Is the card reader going to replace the Poll Clerk? In fact, it is still a mystery to me at our level of electoral development what the card reader is meant to achieve. Anyway, you must have a PVC before the card reader can be used. What if the card reader is faulty? I will round off by making a passionate appeal to INEC to please drop the idea of disenfranchising eligible voters for lack of PVC. Blame for non-possession of PVC should be placed at the doorstep of INEC. . More worrisome is the implication of the aforementioned on the voter turnout. Any Electoral Management Body (EMB) that refuses to take into cognizance the confidence of the voter in the electoral system and the level of participation in the democratic process is invariably plunging the nation into legitimacy crisis. If democracy is the government of the majority, a situation where less than half the voter population elect the representatives could not be said to be democratic in actual terms. Please, Professor, you have the power and posterity has put you in a position to avert an impeding crisis. You have a duty to revisit the way INEC is embarking on this journey of 2015 elections. . Jeje is an Election Manager and Permanent Secretary, Lagos State Independent Electoral Commission.
Posted on: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 21:38:18 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015