2011 elections: Challenges and prospects
I am very pessimistic that the 2011 election is not going to be free and fair as presumed by the INEC chairman. This is because Prof.Maurice Iwu said the same thing and at the end what happened? It was a mess and full of rigging here and there. Therefore, Prof.Jega cannot promise the whole world […]
I am very pessimistic that the 2011 election is not going to be free and fair as presumed by the INEC chairman. This is because Prof.Maurice Iwu said the same thing and at the end what happened? It was a mess and full of rigging here and there. Therefore, Prof.Jega cannot promise the whole world that he can conduct a free, fair and credible elections in 2011.
Hence, Nigerians are unpredictable in terms of corruption and more so, the incumbent is still in power. President Good luck Jonathan cannot be an umpire and at the same time be a player. By so doing, he is not going to conduct a free and fair elections. If actually he wants to conduct a free and fair elections, he is not supposed to contest an election since it is still the turn of the North.
Although it is being said that he has the right to contest and the constitution allows him to do so. But, if I were him, I wouldn’t contest an election in view of people’s criticisms that he is supposed to stay away from contesting so that he will be able to conduct a fair, free and credible elections if he means to do so. Again, with the enormous challenges involved and coupled with the fact that INEC is under the control of the federal government and since it was the federal government that appointed him, certainly, INEC chairman will be loyal and compromised to President Jonathan who put him there. This means that, INEC cannot conduct a fair, free and credible elections, which they have been clamoring for.
However, in any election, there must be a winner and a loser and whoever wins, the loser should accept defeat. It is God that chooses a leader and God knows the right person to be chosen as a leader. So, the winning of any political aspirant depends solely on the electorates who will determine the candidate of their choice because we need a credible leader who will steer the affairs of this country and one who can equally ameliorate our dwindling economy and not a leader who will add to our predicament. The issue of saying that this person or that person is not qualified to contest an election should not arise. We should leave every criticism to the electorates to decide and we should have it in our minds that leadership is from God and if one is destined to lead, no matter the ups and downs, such person must surely occupy such leadership position. More so, leadership is not a do-or-die affair and this should not generate rancor in the country simply because the candidate of the other group does not win. That is not democracy. In a democratic setting, everybody has the opportunity of freedom of speech and also the right of choice.
Politics should always be practiced without bitterness since politics is the process and method of making decisions for groups, and any activity aimed at influencing those decisions. Although it is generally applied to governments; politics is also observed in all human group interactions including corporate, academic, and religious.
In the recent past, Nigeria has been in the news mainly in the light of several sad incidents of political conflicts and assassination of political opponents in this our democratic dispensation and if not checked, the perception of heightened tensions as we approach the 2011 elections will emerge.
The Nigerian political scene has recently shifted from military regimes to a democratically elected one. However, the just ‘democratic dividend’ has hardly materialized in terms of any improvement in ordinary people’s living standards, and the incumbent regime, although democratically elected, has lost a substantial degree of trust.
Therefore, the most free, fair and peacefully conducted elections in Nigeria were those of 1959, 1979, 1983 and 1999, and the most chaotic, violent and disputed were those of 1964 and 1992. The reason for this is that the first three were ‘transition’ elections, in which the regimes in power and responsible for organizing the elections had to hand over power to a democratic civilian regime. In contrast, the other elections can be viewed as potential ‘consolidation’ elections, in which an elected civilian government was responsible for organizing elections to hand over power to a successor regime. So the current PDP regime has devolved the conduct of the 2003 elections to the Independent National Electoral Commission, although there is considerable debate as to whether this body is vulnerable to political pressure. It can be seen, then, that a second consecutive peaceful and successful election would be an important symbolic milestone in Nigeria’s history.
INEC may be faced with some challenges as follows; challenges of conducting a successful and credible election. The is need to bring some innovations in the electoral system so as to create a framework for sustainable democracy in Nigeria. The multi parties introduced would also hinder election.
Therefore, with the enormous challenges ahead of INEC like multiplicity of parties; inadequate voters registration cards; logistics problems and changing date of elections from the initial time table, one can argue that INEC lacks the independence and the capabilities to conduct a free and fair elections.
Isah wrote from the University of [email protected]