Background
The Nigeria general elections will now hold on April 9, 16 and 26 following the postponement announced by Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on April 2. Political parties and candidates have seized the extension for last minute campaign. Even though the elections were postponed midway on April 2 the conduct of Nigeria police officers and other security agencies is commendable as reports from various observers indicate that they arrived the polling centres on time and stayed until the postponement was officially announced. The postponement has however thrown up new security challenges requiring careful planning and response from security agencies ahead of the April 9, 16 and 26 elections.
Various conspiracy theories and accusations of sabotage have emerged since the postponement raising suspicion between candidates and political parties. In many states, oppositions have pointed accusing fingers at the ruling parties alleging plans to scuttle, rig elections and deceive electorates. In many states, electorates actually voted even after the postponement had been announced, due in part to delayed communications and suspicion that it ‘was a plan by some parties to deceive electorates and rig the elections’. In many states, helpless ad-hoc staff and INEC field officers could not stop the anxious crowd of electorates for fear of being lynched. In many of these places votes were counted and results were announced. It was reported that Security operatives in a particular location in Nassarawa state lynched some observers who came to the polling unit with mobile phones. The soldiers claimed to be acting on instruction of the National Security Adviser banning use of cell phones and other recording devices at polling stations and urging electorates to keep a distance of 300 Ametres away after casting their votes.
Various reports from the field on April 2 have raised several questions including whether the votes cast and results announced are valid? Whether accreditation done for voters on April 2 is valid and electorates do not have to go through another rigor of accreditation come April 9th. Are cell phones and recording devices permitted at voting stations on election days? Can Nigerians stay back to monitor and protect their votes after casting their ballots?
INEC has announced that all voting activities including accreditation and actual voting done on April 2 in any parts of Nigeria is null and void and reassured Nigerians that it is impossible for unscrupulous politicians to fake the sensitive materials already in circulation. The Chairman in his meeting with CSOs reiterated the position of the Commission; that Nigerians are entitled to bring their cell phones and any other recording devices and could stay back at polling stations for announcement of results and to monitor the collation. But considering the do or die attitude of candidates it is advisable for security officials to closely monitor the polling units and local governments where elections were held and results declared on April 2. It is worthy to note as well that some of the states were included in our flashpoints in previous weekly briefing which makes then quite volatile. With the several conspiratorial theories in circulation the CSO Working Group is worried that supporters of opposition parties are likely to be over vigilant and extra suspicious; a situation that could be inflamed by the slightest provocation.
Continuing Elections Security Concerns
1. Implementation of the Directive to ‘Vote and Go Home’: This directive has been credited to the Inspector General and the NSA, who have insisted that voters should leave polling centers after casting their votes. The NSA for example insisted on national television that the issues of mandate protection should be left to ‘party officials’. In response to criticisms by civil society, the Police Spokesperson has made fruitless efforts to clarify this directive. With political parties and candidates insisting and encouraging their supporters to vote and stay back at the polling centres, this conflicting instruction is a major security concern for the CSO working party.
2. Implementation of the Directive not to use camera phones or electronic devises at polling centres – like the directive on 300 metres distance from polling units, the beating of election observers in Nasarrawa state for coming to the polling centre with cell phones and camcorders underscores the urgent need to address this confusion. Communication gaps between INEC and the Security Agencies: INEC has in many different fora distanced itself from the aforementioned directives, and this raises questions as to the level of communication between the leadership of INEC, the Police and the NSA. The different positions of INEC, the Police and NSA on these issues should not be if the ICCES actually meets regularly as they purport and if they actually talk.
2. Failed INEC logistics and the aborted elections: Reports from the field indicate that in some states such as Kaduna, people continued with voting in spite of the announced cancellation and that in some other states in the South West, results were actually announced. The postponement of elections, no matter how justifiable, however creates a possible scenario where candidates who loose subsequently might incite violent protests on the grounds that they would have won in the postponed elections. This makes every place where people voted on April 2 potential spot for violence. Also, some observers were not granted access to some polling centers because they did have INEC identification tags, which INEC had not produced sufficiently. For example in GSS Wuse Zone 3, Abuja, it was reported that a police officer on electoral duty there (Audu Ajekam, Force number 239374) refused to allow the observers into the polling station, unless they showed him proper INEC IDs, though they had accreditation letters from INEC.
Recommendations
We recommend the following to ensure better policing of the elections:
1. A clear directive should be issued to security personnel on electoral duty to allow people peacefully observe elections after voting. .
2. The directive banning use of camera phones and similar electronic materials at polling centres should be withdrawn especially since INEC also insists that it would employ electronic surveillance of the elections. The IGP and NSA should quickly pass instructions through the commands to all security personnel on election duties.
3. Deployment to locations where voting took place and results were announced during the botched April 2 elections should be strategic with extra vigilance to quell any potential violence. .
4. The Police deserve some commendation and have shown that it is not the weakest link on elections security as previously supposed. For example, incidents of ballot snatching were reported in Ikara LGA in Kaduna state, Okpaku LGA and Aga council Ward and North Secretariat ward, Markudi in Benue state. These incidents were immediately brought to the attention of police authorities in the respective states and they were adequately addressed. We hope that this trend would continue and hopefully they would provide the much needed synergy and coordination for other security agencies involved in the elections.
This briefing is a weekly production of ‘CSO Working Party on Security and the 2011 Elections’. The underlisted are member organizations:
1. Africa Centre for Leadership, Strategy and Development, Abuja
2. Alliance for Credible Elections, Abuja
3. Borno Coalition for Democracy and Progress, Maiduguri
4. Centre for Human Rights and Civic Education, Kano
5. CLEEN Foundation
6. Civil Resources Development and Documentation Centre (CIRRDOC)
7. Institute for Community Policing, Port Harcourt
8. League of Human Rights, Jos
9. National Human Rights Commission
10. Network of National Human Rights Institute – West Africa
11. Open Society Initiative West Africa (OSIWA)
12. Open Society Justice Initiative (OSJI)
13. Transition Monitoring group (TMG)