Making The Bold Leap Towards Free And Fair Elections

We could put this vexed issue of election rigging behind us once and for all. There is a way. We continue to have this problem every four years, with it concomitant costs in terms of loss of human lives, damaged personal and public property, dashed collective hopes and aspirations, underdevelopment, and inordinate state brigandage, because we have continued to use the same, demonstrably bankrupt method to confront the problem. It does no good either to abandon one failed method for another pathetic one.

Without intending at all to dampen enthusiasm for the 2011 elections, I will say my take on the manner the INEC has handled the pre-election phase is that the 2011 elections will not be markedly different from the 2003 and 2007 elections. The ominous characteristics of the 2011 pre-election phase are the same things we saw in 2003 and 2007. Perhaps Jega has good intentions, but his INEC has so far been engaged in a razzmatazz, a hyper-exorbitant circus that the late Fela Kuti would call perambulation – energy-wasting spin without any translational movement. I prefer to be wrong here, but the facts on ground suggest that the 2011 elections will be another round of dashed hopes and stolen mandates.

I have said elsewhere that for voter participation in the 2011 elections to make sense all political parties and their candidates (especially the opposition) and the INEC should thoroughly gather as much forensic evidence as they could of the 2011 elections (covering the entire process), in hope that such evidence might help in the judicial redemption of stolen mandates and for the prosecution of election riggers. Sorry – I just babbled: prosecution of election riggers? I must not be living on earth. Not by the INEC, not by our government – at least not by one led by a man whose life is based on good luck rather than principles and sound judgments.

Beyond the 2011 elections, however, we must begin to plan and build the information technology (IT) infrastructure; procure the necessary, quality gadgets; and grow the technical wherewithal and manpower that would make the elections in 2015 and beyond truly free and fair.

I aim to proffer an alternative to Option A4 – an alternative that has been suggested before, drawing on an extant, quick identity authentication system that is foolproof and non-duplicable and that has become very ordinary in many countries. First, though, I will tell you why I believe we should move beyond Option A4. Of necessity, this discussion will be brief and done in broad outlines.

Option A4
This was an open ballot system used by the Prof. Humphrey Nwosu-led National Electoral Commission of Nigeria (NECON) for the June 12, 1993, presidential election between Chief Moshood Abiola of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and Alhaji Bashir Tofa of the National Republican Convention (NRC). This election has been universally adjudged the freest and fairest election Nigeria has ever conducted. As a refresher and to inform those who do not know the details of Option A4, I will quote a succinct description of it given by Ephraim Adinlofu in his article “Elections in Nigeria: A Case for Option A4″ (Nigerians in America, March 27, 2008):

There were no ballot papers, neither were there ballot boxes. All that the electorate were asked to do was to go to their voting centres, check their names on the electoral register and wait until it was time for voting. We had one of our thumbs inked for easy identification during voting.

When it was time, every electorate was asked to queue up behind his or her candidate’s poster.

The counting of the voters was done by the electoral officer accompanied by the representatives of SDP and NRC. It was then entered in a result sheet, which, if I may still recall, was in triplicate. It was signed by both the electoral officer and the representatives of the two political  parties. The returning officer took his copy and the representatives of the parties took theirs.

They returned to the electoral headquarters with their respective results where all results were being collated. At the headquarters, the SDP and NRC representatives gave their results to their party representatives respectively, while the electoral officer gave his to his boss. The signatures were verified and figures cross checked and entered. Simple! That was the operational modus of option A4 in 1993. Whereas it has been rumored in certain quarters that the Electoral Reform Committee (ERC), headed by Justice Muhammadu Lawal Uwais, recommended Option A4 in its final report, this is not true.

Those who clamour for full implementation of the ERC’s recommendations should bear this in mind. The system of voting recommended by the ERC in paragraph 6.7.1.2 of the said report is the Open Secret Ballot System, which is what we have used throughout this fourth republic:

There are practices associated with the current voting system that are worthy of retention. The following are accordingly recommended:

(a) Open Secret Ballot System: This allows a voter to go into a polling booth to mark his ballot in secrecy and drop it in the ballot box in the open.

Now, let us consider the obvious merits of Option A4:
• Option A4 was cheap. There was no need to buy ballot boxes or print ballot papers. There was no need either to spend money on transporting these materials.
• It was quick. Because ballot papers were not used, no time was expended in counting ballot papers after voting had ended.
• The process was very transparent at the voting centre. Voters queued behind the posters of their preferred candidates and were counted in full view of everybody. The result was immediately known to everybody present at the voting centre.
• There was no invalid vote. Once a voter was accredited and queued behind his preferred candidate, his vote was automatically valid. There was no occasion for making errors on a ballot paper that could result in the invalidation of a vote.
• There was no snatching or stuffing of ballot boxes.
• There were no fake ballot papers. There were no ghost voters either. Voters had to be physically present to be counted.
The biggest demerits of Option A4 should also be obvious:
• The secrecy of a voter’s choice was sacrificed. As much as many of us admire Option A4, this is not a demerit which should be taken lightly. It is a contravention of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which in Article 21 says, “The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote (emphasis mine) or by equivalent free voting procedures.” This right of every individual to secret ballot is also enshrined in Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
• In an atmosphere of voter intimidation or vote buying, the lack of secrecy would, in the very least least, potentially compromise the freeness of the voting process.
• The absence of ballot papers (physical or electronic) makes it harder to objectively validate the (in)accuracy of the declared election results should those results be disputed in court.
Plainly, the transparency which Option A4 confers on the voting process ends at the polling unit. As with the Open Secret Ballot System, it is still possible for election results under Option A4 to be doctored at the collation centres and at the state and national secretariats of INEC. This is even more so, considering that there are no ballot papers for validation of announced results.
I sense that somebody reading this would immediately object and say that the signed result sheets from the polling units would be available to prove the (un)truth of any results declared at the state or national secretariats of  INEC. Just remember, guys, that we are talking about Naija and that since the beginning of this fourth republic we have been using those result sheets; but election results have been successfully twisted beyond recognition. I do not need to remind you that printing of fake result sheets and falsification of documents are the least of the worries of Naija’s election riggers. Once the right egunje is passed around, okpare-o.

—Choice Ekpekurede