No true winners

All things being equal, by the time this goes to print, there would have been an declared winner in last Saturday’s shambolic presidential and national assembly elections. In a democracy, the people ought to be the ultimate winners. As huge ships have captains, electoral bodies handle elections. If a captain is drunk, a ship’s final destination is in jeopardy. If an electoral umpire is handicapped or jaundiced, they produce doubtful electoral outcomes.

The final death toll from Saturday’s polls is still being collated. Not a word from the major political players about the deaths resulting from needless violence. The dead can wait, the outcome cannot. No tributes for the dead, the wounded are left to their own devices and the traumatized electoral officials would have no access to counseling.

Elections are a complex issue anywhere in the world. That is why electoral bodies are not disbanded after the conduct of polls. Like organic entities, they are expected to carry out post mortems and plug gaping holes. Sorry Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC did not perform up to par. It could blame late virements all it could but that excuse would be akin to the alibis of the lazy workman blaming his tools. The signals were there that INEC would run into trouble several weeks before the polls. But Professor Mahmoud Yakubu kept swearing that the polls would hold only to make the nation a laughing stock with a postponement three and a half hours before they were due to begin nationwide. Supporters of the ruining party that promised change went on the offensive, tabulating precedents.

The ding-dong that followed that announcement between the two dominant parties ranged from the ridiculous to the sublime. One side blamed the other for orchestrating the postponement. Calls for Yakubu’s resignation were stridently rebuffed as ploy by the ruling clique to truncate with the electoral process. In our climes, resignations are uncommon. People wait to be kicked to the curb.

The people were the ultimate losers. The nation had been locked down, preventing movements and any reasonable form of commercial activities. Elections that other nations carry out as routine happen under strict curfew here.

For those whose daily survival depend on daily hustle, this was not, as some have dubbed it, a Holy Saturday. Marriages, burials and other civil activities require long and meticulous planning. Celebrants finalize their plans not to conflict with INEC’s electoral calendar. People travel from within and outside natural and national borders for these events. People’s plans were thrown into quandary. Some died needlessly because INEC could not make up its mind in spite of glaring problems. Prof. Yakubu swore on the sanctity of his timetable.

On D-Day INEC’s performance was far from encouraging. That elections were shifted to Sunday in several areas is perhaps the best evidence. Our almighty card readers did not disappoint its critics but INEC was quick to remind us that they worked in the polling units of major stakeholders! After wasting billions of taxpayer’s money with its postponement, INEC still failed the litmus test.

Nobody who is not in government or in power expects security. Even political office holders guaranteed immunity and security know that security is dependent on loyalty to the government in power. Politricians love to downplay security concerns in an election season. Casualty figures are underestimated and homage to victims of violence is omitted from speeches and press statements. Except where a major contender is affected, everything is presumed okay.

Security officials were more interested in protecting those whose violent tendencies support the interest of their political godfathers rather than protecting the freedom of those exercising their franchise. Unarmed security was supposed to shield the democratic process from militarization except that it did not. Video evidence suggests that security agents helped thugs to intimidate voters, snatch, destroy and burn or compromise electoral materials in opposition strongholds. Ruling party agents suggested those to be arrested, intimidated or detained. Their suggestions became law. Given the above scenario, the outcomes of last Saturday’s elections are compromised.

Granted the level of violence unleashed on voters, it would be hard to hope for increased people’s participation in the electoral process in future. Given that innocent election officials are usually at the receiving end of party or state-sponsored violence, it would be difficult to mobilize youths for future election duty. The bulk of those on election duty were members of the NYSC. These young people were supposed to feel proud of playing important roles in midwifing the democratic process; instead they are traumatized and scared to death by the whole scenario. It was shameful to see these young people sleeping rough on the streets though budgets had been made for their accommodation. When it’s all done and dusted, they would have to wait on queues for long hours or days to get their meagre allowances.

All said and done, there might have been ‘declared’ winners and losers in this electoral process; in reality, there are no true winners. Wherever the overwhelming forces of coercion and intimidation subjugate freedom of choice, the end-result of such process is compromised and undemocratic.