Nigerians are criticizing President Buhari’s
appointments as nepotistic, especially his choice of the heads of security
agencies and the electoral commission. The prevailing argument that this is a
clever style of managing the electoral process in his favor steers us into an
appraisal of such appointments by the previous governments. Ensuring the
successful conduct of elections in Nigeria involves the collaborative effort of
several agencies - including the Civil Defense, Army and State Security Service
- but Police and INEC are the most crucial. INEC conduct elections and police
leads the provision of security. The appraisal thus focuses on these two
outfits.
Individuals referenced are classified
based on their states of origin and geopolitical zones as currently defined in
Nigeria. The zones are abbreviated thus: South-West (SW), South-East (SE),
South-South (SS) North-West (NW), North-Central (NC), and the North-East (NE).
Is President Buhari’s appointment of
the 2019 election handlers nepotistic? In the first republic (1963-1966),
President Nnamdi Azikwe, a native of Anambra State (SE), appointed Louis Edet
from Cross River State (SS) as the Inspector General of Police, IGP. Eyo Ita
Esua from Cross River State (SS) was appointed the head of the Federal
Electoral Commission. You would note that the president and the heads of FEC
and police were not from the same geopolitical zone. The military seized power
in 1966.
To conduct the election that’ll usher
in the second republic in 1979, then General Olusegun Obasanjo from Ogun State
(SW) appointed Chief Michael Ani from Cross River State (SS) as Chairman of the
Federal Electoral Commission. Muhammadu Dikko Yusufu from Katsina State (NW)
was appointed the IGP. The head-of-state and the heads of FEC and police were
not from the same geopolitical zone. Obasanjo transferred power to Shehu
Shagari, but (Nigeria’s incumbent president) then General Muhammadu Buhari
seized power via a military coup in 1983. General Ibrahim Babangida later
ousted him in 1985.
After being pressurized by a national
campaign for democratic rule, Babangida promised to conduct elections and hand
over power in 1993 – the third republic. Babangida, a native of Niger State
(NC) appointed Professor Humprey Nwosu, an indigene of Anambra State (SE), as
the Chairman of the National Electoral Commission. Aliyu Atta from Adamawa State
(NE) was appointed the IGP. Please note that the military-president and the
heads of NEC and police were not from the same geopolitical zone.
To conduct the election that brought
on the (Obasanjo led 1999-2003) fourth republic, General Abdusalami Abubakar
from Niger State (NC) appointed Justice Ephraim Akpata from Edo State (SS) as
the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC. Ibrahim
Coomassie, an indigene of Katsina State (NW), was appointed the IGP. Again,
General Abubakar and the heads of INEC and police were not from the same
geopolitical zone.
Ex-President Obasanjo’s second term
was the fifth republic (2003-2007). The election that earned him the term was
handled by then INEC Chairman Abel Guobadia (Edo, SS) and IGP Mustafa Balogun
(Osun, SW). Appointments of the two crucial election handlers were not
only allotted to the South, the police IG was from Obansanjo’s geopolitical zone,
the SW. This is not the case now in Buhari’s government. Buhari, a native of
Katsina State (NW) appointed Mamood Yakubu (Bauchi, NE) and Idris Kpotun
(Niger, NC) as INEC and police heads. Although Buhari dispensed the
appointments to northerners, he and the two appointees are from separate
northern geopolitical zones. In essence, Obasanjo’s appointment of INEC and
police heads when he was seeking reelection in 2003 is even more sectional than
what we have now.
It is appalling that facts about an
issue that could diminish Buhari’s votes, especially in the South, stay
unutilized. Why is the work of presidential aides being left for independent
analysts in an election season? Buhari’s aides are either unmindful of the harm
negative public perceptions could do to their principal or they are simply
overconfident he would win. But on a second look, why was Obasanjo’s
appointment not criticized? Why are people afraid that Buhari’s appointments
could breed electoral fraud, but weren’t troubled during Obasanjo’s rule?
The issue is best explained
empirically. When Ex-President Goodluck Jonathan increased petrol price from 67
to 87 Naira, people protested because his government was widely rated as
corrupt. They didn’t trust him. But when President Buhari increased petrol price
from 87 to 145 Naira, the protest was very minimal because Nigerians see him as
a non-corrupt person. Trust is the keyword here.
People never protested against
Obasanjo’s more sectional appointment of INEC and police heads because they
didn’t see him as nepotistic and chauvinistic. His other key appointments (of national
security adviser and heads of civil defense, army, the state security service etc.)
reflected Nigeria’s ethnic pluralism. That cannot be said of Buhari. He is more
sectional than national.
The heads of all the above mentioned
agencies are from the North. SSS is currently being led by Mathew Seiyefa (Bayelsa,
SS) due to dismissal of Lawal Daura (Katsina, NW) and there are reports of
ongoing moves to replace him with a northerner. Nigerians are pessimistic about
getting a credible election in 2019 as the influence of these outfits’ activities
on election results cannot be undermined. Does nepotism breed electoral fraud? We
must resist the appetite to digress. I’ll dissect the issue after concluding
the ethnic and geopolitical appraisal of individuals appointed to handle the
conduct of past national elections.
The election that ushered in the (late
Umaru Yar’Adua led) sixth republic was conducted by the Obasanjo
administration. The poll was handled by then INEC Chairman, Professor Maurice
Iwu (Imo, SE) and IGP Sunday Ehindero (Ondo, SW). In this case, Obasanjo’s
appointment of non-northerners can be argued as ensuring fairness and
transparency since the election was mainly a contest between northern
candidates – late Umaru Yar'Adua for the PDP, M. Buhari for the defunct ANPP,
and Atiku Abubakar for the defunct AC.
Yar’Adua’s death left a vacuum in
government. His vice, Goodluck Jonathan (Bayelsa, SS), was sworn in on May 5,
2010 to complete the four-year tenure of the sixth republic (2007-2011). As the
term ends, Jonathan turned down the northern oligarchy’s request to takeover.
He contested, won and governed Nigeria in the seventh republic (2011-2015). The
election that returned him elected was handled by the northerners he appointed.
Prof. Attahiru Jega (Kebbi, NW) was the INEC Chairman and Hafiz Ringim (Jigawa,
NE) was the IGP. Unlike the Buhari administration, Jonathan was mindful of
Nigeria’s ethnic sensitivity and majority of his appointment favored other
ethnic groups, especially the northern lived Hausa-Fulani. He retained Jega as
INEC Chairman and appointed Suleiman Abba (Jigawa, NE) as IGP for the 2015
elections.
Jonathan lost the race to rule
Nigeria in the eight republic (2015-2019) to incumbent President Buhari. He
conceded defeat. Oppositely, when Jonathan floored Buhari in the 2011
presidential election, the latter’s supporters violently protested, killed and
destroyed properties in the north. Would the 2011 post-election violence not
have been more devastating if the election handlers and service chiefs were
Southerners from Jonathan’s ethnic extraction? Ensuring appointments into
sensitive positions are fairly distributed remains one of the most effective
means of maintaining public trust, dousing inter-ethnic bigotry and erasing
agitation for succession in a plural state like Nigeria. Does nepotism breed
electoral fraud? How will nepotism, vote-buying and underage voting affect the
outcome of the 2019 presidential election?
In the history of Nigeria, Buhari is
the first ruler to appoint an INEC Chairman from his region, the NW. He
appointed his supposed relation, Mrs Amina Zakari, as the acting INEC Chairman
in June 2015. After several criticisms, Prof Mahmood Yakubu was appointed to
replace her as the substantive chairman in October 2015. The relationship
between Zakari and Yakubu is so strong that it has the tendency to influence
the outcome of the elections in favor of Buhari. The nepotism and sectionalism in
Buhari’s government is also present in INEC’s leadership.
Vote buying and underage voting are
electoral crimes, but INEC and police have been unable to stem the tide. The
two agencies only condemns. They are unwilling to prosecute electoral
offenders. The northern region has the highest case of underage voting, while
vote-buying has recently gained prominence across the country. In all fairness,
affection for Buhari can’t be argued as the sole reason for underage
registration and voting in the north. The north has always had a substantial
registration of underage voters before Buhari became president. Nonetheless,
his reelection bid has led to an increase in such for political gain. In 2019,
(regular and) underage voting would be a huge gain for Buhari in his northern
stronghold.
In other regions, Buhari currently have
an above-average support in the SW, fast-rising support in the SE, and a
below-average support in the SS. Vote buying could easily cover up for his
shortfalls in these southern areas. Electoral fraud is bound to occur on a
massive scale in the 2019 elections. APC and Buhari would profit more from it than
the opposition because they are in control of the nation’s finance and force.
With the nepotistic arrangement in place and the forces’ top-down chain of
command, all it takes the force heads is to post their loyalists to key states
in order to allow the Buharists operate unchecked.
Politics is the switch that controls
police operations under IGP Idris Kpotum. Sadly, elections in Nigeria are often
marred by so much irregularity that it is quite easy for the umpire and
security agencies to manipulate the results. Then again, the force heads have
been so political that they have a reason to compromise in order to avoid their
imminent sack, if the opposition wins. Buhari is no doubt a strong candidate,
but the election is being technically managed in such a way that it would be
impossible for him to lose.
INEC and the security agencies
operations largely determine the outcome of elections in Nigeria. The heads
periodically issue obnoxious orders to their subordinates and questioning or
disobeying such orders is treated as an affront, insubordination and
disloyalty. The punishment for such is non-promotion, unfavorable transfers,
and sometimes death. The boss’ mood dictates the actions of the subordinates,
and his wish, whether legal or not, becomes the institution’s mission,
especially during elections. Making chauvinistic appointments into agencies
operating such a closed system - in a nation where people are more committed to
their ethnic groups than to the Nigerian state – is unfortunate for Nigeria’s
democracy and a recipe for electoral fraud.
All that concern a presidential
election in a plural nation should not be regional. In a polity where the instruments
of the state are often used for political gains, a presidential election handled
by heads of INEC and security agencies who are northerners, with an incumbent
northern candidate running, is beyond doubts programmed not be free, fair,
credible or transparent. Such election grievously puts the non-northern
candidates in an extremely disadvantaged position. Ethnic affiliation controls
emotions in Nigerian elections. Ethnic affection inspired the annulment of the
1993 presidential election won by Moshood Abiola. Babangida wouldn’t have
annulled the election if Bashir Tofa (his fellow northerner) won.
Political interests dictates
government policies in Nigeria. The Supreme Court ruled that using electronic
card readers for voter accreditation is not permissible under the Nigerian
electoral laws. The national assembly passed a bill that’ll permit the use of
electronic card readers for the 2019 elections, but Buhari declined assent
twice. The implication of this is that INEC would have to use the manual means
of voter accreditation in 2019 and this would lead to massive electoral fraud.
Buhari must live up to the
responsibility of ensuring Nigerians get a free, fair and credible election,
and accepting the outcome in good faith if defeated. No matter how hard he
tries to be transparent, his nepotistic and chauvinistic conducts, the
inability to manage personal interest, autocracy, and hounding the opposition
could drive Nigeria’s democracy rearward.
*Omoshola Deji is a political and public affairs analyst and could be reached via moshdeji@yahoo.com
