INEC Chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu. Photo; FACBOOK/INECNIGERIA
For democracy to thrive at the grassroots for the benefit of the people and national development, the State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIECs) should be made truly independent to conduct free and fair elections, instead of the sham polls to deliberately impose surrogates of the governors on the communities. For too long, the local governments in most states of the federation have been in ‘captivity’ of the overbearing governors with the aid of the so-called state electoral bodies who conduct elections that are won only by candidates of the governors, who are later used to perpetrate all manners of fraud at the grassroots, including siphoning the council funds. It is sad. The narrative must change.
[ad]
Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Mahmood Yakubu recently came out hard on State Independent Electoral Commissions, describing them as outfits for crowning candidates, instead of conducting proper elections.
During a visit by the Forum of State Independent Electoral Commissions (FOSIEC) to INEC, in Abuja, the chairman lampooned the shoddy elections conducted by SIECS, which lack integrity and have in all cases posted landslide victories for sitting governors and their ruling parties. He berated the state electoral bodies for lacking capacity, with many not having functional offices in the local government areas and not keeping permanent staff.
Yakubu said: “It is time to stop the coronation and conduct proper elections…In some states, the SIECs are either not properly constituted, have no security of tenure or their critical functions have been taken over by government officials. Some SIECs are only constituted on the eve of elections and dissolved thereafter. They are also severely under-resourced to the extent that some of them rely on INEC, even for basic facilities such as ballot boxes and voting cubicles.”
Indeed, the SIECs have debased the idea of election as a basis for periodic performance assessments of governance at the grassroots. In collusion with state governments, the SIEC’s shambolic handling of council elections has made it a laughing stock of local government administration. All over the country, the local government system has lost relevance because of state governments’ overbearing control. The competitiveness and vibrancy envisaged for local government administration in the 1999 Constitution have not been realised. Local governments’ clear areas of jurisdiction as provided in the Constitution have been encroached on by the state governments.
[ad]
For example, the 1999 Constitution, in the Fourth Schedule, assigns functions that the local government council is to undertake. It is the responsibility of the local government to establish and maintain cemeteries, burial grounds and homes for the destitute and the infirm. The local councils are to establish, maintain and regulate slaughterhouses, slaughter slabs, markets, motor parks and public conveniences. The local government administrations are charged with constructing and maintaining roads, streets, drains, etc. Most of these tasks and the revenues that ought to accrue to the local government have been taken over by the state governments.
On elections, Section 7(1) of the Constitution provides for democratically elected council administration. However, the tenure of the administration is stated in the local government law in each state.
While the Constitution is explicit on tenure for governors and lawmakers as well as for the president, it is silent on the tenure of local government administration. It is this lacuna that states have exploited since 1999 to deny councils regular and reliable tenures. Most states are not consistent on council elections. They prefer to appoint caretaker officials who are not the choice of the people and are, therefore, not accountable to them.
Since most local councils are not run democratically, they are unable to deliver development at the most crucial tier where citizens are most impacted. Instead, their loyalty is to the governors who facilitated their nomination and so-called election. The implication is that there is little or no governance at the grassroots.
To enhance good governance at the local government level, we recommend free, fair and credible elections as the first step towards having quality hands to manage governance at that level. Quality elections will also free councils from domination by governors, who prefer to impose surrogates into office.
Due to a lack of confidence in their activities, the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), has advocated the scrapping of the SIECS. He said their functions should be transferred to INEC.
[ad]
In a suit he instituted at the Supreme Court on behalf of the Federal Government, Fagbemi equally demanded that the apex court should void the withholding of local government funds.
The time has come for a holistic review of provisions of the Constitution on local government administration in the country to free them from undue interference by the states. It is time to provide an appropriate mechanism for councils to discharge their responsibilities and carry out the functions outlined in Schedule 4 of the Constitution. The review should also legislate a fixed tenure for elected council officials.
While we do not canvass transfer of SIECs’ duties to INEC for the obvious fact that it would negate the principle of federalism, which popularly identifies two federating units – federal and states- we advocate that local governments can exist as a tier that channels development to the grassroots without jeopardising the spirit of federalism. This is done in other federal democracies, where local administrations operate seamlessly and have been well embedded and accommodated.
Another reason we do not support the transfer of SIECs’ functions to INEC is because the human factor in all elections is subject to manipulation and abuses. This present INEC is not better than many SIECs, as records have shown. Instead of going from frying pan to fire, we recommend more use of technology to deliver quality elections. There is nothing wrong with SIECs collaborating and partnering with INEC and using facilities of the federal electoral body, provided there is accountability. States can even be made to hire facilities of INEC and save the resources for other pressing needs.
We challenge the governors to let local governments survive. Let the tier deliver good governance to citizens at the grassroots.
[ad]