NIGERIAN CIVIL SOCIETY STATEMENT

ON THE

GENERAL ELECTIONS OF APRIL 12TH AND 19TH 2003

Introduction

As Nigerians prepare to vote in the state legislative elections scheduled for Saturday, May 3, 2003, it has become necessary to review the political situation following the conduct of the National Assembly Elections held on Saturday, April 12, 2003 and the Presidential/Gubernatorial Elections held on Saturday, April 19, 2003. This intervention is issued based on observations on the controversy surrounding the elections, especially the reports of the monitoring groups, grievances by some parties, responses by government officials and the mass media.

This review is being conducted by members of civil society organizations involved in election monitoring activities during the last elections. Representatives of 45 organisations1, met in Abuja on Tuesday, April 29 and Wednesday, April 30, 2003 under the auspices of the Electoral Reform Network (ERN) to deliberate on matters arising from the series of elections conducted so far.

The deliberations took into consideration the preliminary reports issued by election observer groups, including the Transition Monitoring Group (TMG), the Catholic Justice, Development and Peace Commission (JDPC), the Labour Election Monitoring Team (LEMT) and the Federation of Muslim Women Associations of Nigeria (FOMWAN) and the Muslim League for Accountability (MULAC). These report were supported by direct evidence of observers who saw events in the electoral terrain.

Collectively, these groups deployed a total of 46,000 observers to cover the 120,000 polling stations in the country. This represent about 31 per cent of the polling stations. In actual fact, our observers covered more polling stations than the total number of monitors because in many communities, between 4 and 8 polling stations are located in the same vicinity. When these units are taken into consideration, Nigerian civil society organizations covered more than one third of the polling stations. Our monitors/observers reports, therefore, a true reflection of events that went on in a substantial numbers of the polling stations.

All these observers/monitors were accredited by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to observe the elections. We believe that the reports of these Nigerians performing a civic duty of election observation must be taken into consideration by the election authorities in determining the success or otherwise of the elections.

Summary of Findings

The evidence available to us confirms that elections/voting took place in some parts of the country – voters had the opportunity to turn up at polling stations, cast their ballots for the candidates of their choice and had results declared reflecting their choice. This ideal situation was actually the exception rather than the rule.

We have evidence that in many polling stations across the country, voters voted, results were declared at some polling stations, while in other there was a conscious decision by electoral personnel not to declare the results. Whether declared or not, these results were manipulated by electoral officers and party officials at collation centers. This was the situation in many local government areas in Anambra State – Njikoka, Aguata, Onitsha and Nnewi; Imo State – Owerri North East, Orlu; and widespread in Rivers, Enugu and Delta States. But a comparision of these results declared at polling stations and recorded by both domestic and international observers, show substantial discrepancies.

The third case scenarios are places where voters were disenfranchised because they did not have the opportunity to vote. Our observers’ report show that elections did not take place in Ughelli North, Ughelli South, Okpe, Patani and some parts of Bomadi and Burutu Local Government Areas of Delta State.

While in some areas, these malpractices were isolated, in other areas, they were part of a systematic plan to either disenfranchise the voters or distort the votes.

In summary, the following represent various forms of malpractices and inadequacies which afflicted the elections, based on the reports of the various monitoring groups:

1. Inadequate preparation by INEC, resulting in logistic problems and inefficiency of its officials, especially on April 12, 2003
2. Pre-election activities, such as voters’ registration and education, were hurriedly carried out by INEC. In particular, the voters’ registration exercise were not effectively done.
3. The display of voters’ register for verification was not effectively done
4. In essence, voters’ registration exercise =s created room for electoral fraud.
5. Inadequately trained INEC official
6. Domineering influence of state governors on INEC officials in many states, including supplying personnel who served as INEC electoral officials
7. Pre-election violence, such as assassinations, especially of members of opposition to the ruling party in many states.
8. Intimidation of opposition by the government, for example reply by President Olusegun Obasanjo and the Inspector-General of Police to General Muhammadu Buhari’s letter of complaint about the management of the April 12, 2003 elections.
9. Violence in many parts of the country resulting in disruption or abortion of elections in many polling stations, especially in the south-South and South-East zones.
10. The use of members of the armed forces to intimidate the electorate and party agents, especially in the South East.
11. Under-age and multiple voting
12. Ballot snatching and ballot stuffing
13. Falsification of results
14. Employment of party faithful as INEC ad-hoc staff

The Disputes

Following the announcement of election results, there were disputes, claims and counter-claims of the circumstances surrounding the elections. We have no doubt, based on our observers’ reports, that in some areas, the elections were conducted and results reflect the will of people. There are also circumstances where cases of electoral malpractices can be left to Election Tribunals to make the determination, whether or not these malpractices substantially affected the outcome of the elections.

The responses of government officials to these reports have been unsatisfactory and, in many cases, undemocratic. The demonisation of aggrieved parties and international observers is unacceptable. The use of government mass media at the Federal and State levels, especially the Nigerian Television Authority (NTA) and the Federal Radio Corporation of Nigerian (FRCN), to malign aggrieved persons, demonise foreign observers and as tool of propaganda to distort the nature and extent of electoral fraud constitute abuse of power.

The resort to falsehood by the Minister of Information and National Orientation, Professor Jerry Gana, during his world press conference, to the effect that the National Orientation Agency deployed 120,000 monitors is unacceptable.

Conclusions and Recommendations

INEC must acknowledge that although it may have set out to conduct free and fair elections, not everything went according to plan. INEC should be bold and honest enough to admit its errors and successes. The INEC cannot seriously claims that elections have been successfully conducted in states such as Rivers, Enugu and Delta. In some other states, including Anambra, Abia, Benue, Imo and Plateau, where the election results have been willfully falsified, INEC must quickly review the process and restore the legitimate votes recorded.

Even in some of these cases, the INEC could reduce the tension in the land by taking a second look at evidence of independent domestic and international observers.

Based on the above, we wish to make the following recommendations:

· In states where elections were not held, INEC should urgently make arrangements to conduct elections there
· The Election Petition Tribunals should not succumb to corrupt inducement, threat or intimidation from any quarters. They should not give priorities to technicalities over substantive issues and must aim to do substantial justice
· The demonisation of aggrieved parties and observers should stop
· The use of government-controlled mass media, especially the NTA and
· the FRCN, to distort the nature and extent of electoral fraud should stop. This constitutes and abuse of power.
· Government officials should desist from using derogatory statements that do not reflect reality against opposition and observers
· Nigerians should learn to let people express their democratic rights and freedoms without ethnic, religious and regional prejudice
· The phenomenon of rented crowds of associations, professions, unions visiting state houses and the presidency has emerged again as was the case during the Abacha regime to congratulate “winners”: and condemn opposition. This is a shameful exhibition of corruption, opportunism and lack of principles by both parties involved – government and the “crowd” of visitors.
· The Constitution needs to be amended and Electoral Act reviewed to make INEC truly independent and not mere appointees of the President. There is also a need to prohibit the use of government facilities and funds to prosecute the election campaign of incumbent office holders.

We hope that the May 3, 2003 elections will be free from the malpractices and fraud recorded in the previous elections. We commend the electorate for their commitment to democracy and their perseverance so far and urge them to continue to believe in the democratic process and turn out in large numbers to vote on May 3.

Signed by:

Olawale Fapohunda Angela Odah
Electoral Reform Nework (ERN) Transition Monitoring Group (TMG)

Chukwuma Ezeala John A. Kolawole
Justice Development and Peace Commission (JDPC) Labour Election Monitoring Team
(LEMT)

Rekiya Momoh
Federation of Muslim Women Associations of Nigeria
(FOMWAN) and the Muslim League for Accountability
(MULAC).

The Election Review Meeting and this publication is made possible by the Electoral Reform Network (ERN)