A new national coalition, known as the Save Democracy Mega Alliance 2027 (SDMA’27), has initiated a campaign aimed at amending Nigeria’s constitution to eliminate the President's control over the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the authority of state governors over the State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIECs). Since its inception last month, this initiative has received considerable support from many Nigerians.
Additionally, the coalition is advocating for constitutional amendments that would also revoke the President's powers concerning the judiciary, particularly regarding the appointment of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) and the Chief Judge of States by governors.
Prior to the coalition's campaign launch, there had been widespread calls from various sectors of society to strip the President of the authority to appoint the heads of both the electoral and judicial branches of government. The rationale behind this demand is that such appointments do not ensure the complete independence of these institutions, as the saying goes, "he who pays the piper dictates the tune."
The coalition argues that transferring these powers away from the President would mitigate executive influence over the electoral and judicial systems. They propose that the responsibility for appointing the leaders of these institutions be assigned to a newly established independent body.
Tony Akeni Le Moin, the spokesperson for the group, recently addressed the media in Abuja, announcing plans for a formal campaign launch across all states, culminating in a "boot camp" event in Abuja. He emphasized that the SDMA’27 is focused on two primary constitutional amendments: removing the appointment powers from the President and governors and delegating these responsibilities to a group of non-partisan individuals who have been vetted for integrity.
The coalition has received endorsements from notable leaders and pro-democracy organizations nationwide, including support from Professor Pat Utomi, a distinguished political economist.
Utomi has characterized the movement as a pivotal achievement for Nigeria's democracy since 1999, and he highlighted the Justice Uwais Electoral Reform report as the most suitable foundation for progress.
He noted that the report advocates for reforms in the executive appointments related to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the judiciary, asserting that shielding these institutions from executive interference would promote equitable elections and enhance governance.
The coalition has proposed a three-pronged strategy, which includes fostering a national consensus among political, religious, and civil society groups to generate a collective demand for constitutional reforms. Their objective is to create momentum for a national conference aimed at formally suggesting amendments and to advocate for both the national and state assemblies to diminish the executive's excessive influence over INEC and the judiciary.
This initiative, according to the coalition, is intended to prevent a recurrence of the troubling events that marred the 2023 elections in 2027.
They cautioned that without these reforms, the 2027 elections could merely replicate previous electoral manipulations.
The coalition invoked the words of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. regarding the necessity of organized resistance, calling on Nigerians to brace for what they termed a "national emergency" to restore democracy in Nigeria.
In response to these developments, Dr. Pogu Bitrus, president of the Middle Belt Forum (MBF), remarked to DAILY POST that the issue is not solely about who makes appointments, but rather about who has the authority to dismiss.
He emphasized that beyond the question of dismissal, it is crucial to fortify the institution so that the identity of the appointing or dismissing authority becomes less significant, as a robust institution would ensure accountability and oversight.
He stated, "The reality in Nigeria is not merely about who appoints the head of the electoral commission or the judiciary, but rather about who has the power to dismiss. While the ability to dismiss is important to some degree, it is the strength of the institution that ultimately matters."
If the president possesses the authority to appoint individuals but lacks the power to dismiss or remove them, this could potentially address the issue at hand.
The apprehension of termination for failing to comply with directives is what compels individuals to act in accordance with expectations, rather than merely due to their appointment. If an individual is appointed but does not feel the threat of dismissal for noncompliance, they may not feel obligated to adhere to the wishes of their appointing authority. Therefore, the critical factor is not who appoints but rather who has the authority to terminate.
Furthermore, it is essential to fortify the institution to a degree that individuals would fear engaging in misconduct.
For example, in China, there exists a regulation whereby one may face severe consequences, including the loss of life, for actions that might be considered minor infractions in other contexts, such as receiving gratuities, let alone serious bribery.
If judges, the head of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), or any other officials are aware that engaging in wrongful conduct could lead to fatal repercussions, they are less likely to compromise their integrity, regardless of the financial incentives involved. Such stringent checks and balances can deter misconduct and encourage adherence to ethical standards.
Thus, the focus should not solely be on who appoints or dismisses individuals, but rather on the authority to terminate and the necessity of reinforcing laws to ensure robust checks and balances.
Moreover, the legal framework should be strengthened to the extent that individuals understand the severe consequences of wrongdoing, including the potential obliteration of their families, which would serve as a powerful deterrent.
In conclusion, these are the reforms that should be integrated into the legal system, rather than merely debating the dynamics of appointment. Additionally, the law should extend to hold accountable those who influence others to commit wrongful acts, ensuring that they face consequences equivalent to those of the offenders.
This approach will help guarantee that actions are conducted appropriately. The underlying issue is not the absence of laws; rather, there are existing laws that theoretically provide checks and balances. However, the weakness of the institutions renders these laws ineffective.
It is essential to understand how to enhance the integrity of institutions such as INEC, the police, the military, and the judiciary, ensuring their independence. This independence will foster genuine probity and accountability, ultimately leading to a greater respect for the law.
The current state of the system has been compromised, necessitating stringent regulations and laws to restore proper functioning.
In his remarks, Alhaji Yerima Shettima, the president of the Arewa Youth Consultative Forum (AYCF), expressed skepticism regarding the establishment of an independent entity to oversee such appointments. He noted that the system has become so centralized that granting autonomy to a separate body may be unfeasible, given the extensive powers held by the president and commander-in-chief.
He questioned the notion of independence within a centralized system, advocating instead for decentralization. He remarked, "Who truly possesses independence in the country today?"
Specifically addressing the appointment of the INEC chairman, which is anticipated to undergo screening and nomination by the National Assembly (NASS), he acknowledged the prevailing concerns but emphasized that the president remains the ultimate authority overseeing all matters.
Furthermore, he expressed doubt about the current National Assembly's ability to diminish the president's powers. He referenced the perceived rubber-stamp nature of the NASS to support his viewpoint.
He stated, "It is improbable that the president will be stripped of the authority to appoint the INEC chairman or the Chief Justice of Nigeria under the current NASS, which I consider to be entirely a rubber stamp. I do not wish to expend energy on the belief that such changes will occur. Perhaps in the future, this may be possible, but not at this time."
He also underscored the importance of robust institutions as a solution to many of the challenges currently facing the nation.
Furthermore, he recommended that rather than expending energy on efforts to diminish the president's authority, the group or any individuals involved should unite to advocate for the fortification of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as an institution, ensuring it is no longer subject to the influences of any individual, including the president.
“Instead of squandering our efforts on that front, let us focus on how we can enhance the institutions. The issue is not merely about the independence of INEC, but about reinforcing INEC as a credible institution.
“There are numerous reforms that need to be implemented within INEC. If these reforms are successfully enacted, I believe we would address many of the challenges facing INEC, thereby diminishing the president's ability to exert influence over the commission,” he stated.
In addition, Adebayo Fadipe, a prominent member of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Lagos State, praised this initiative, asserting that it would help restore the credibility of the electoral body.
He expressed the view that the term ‘independence’ associated with the electoral body is merely superficial, as it remains firmly under the control of the president, who has the authority to appoint and dismiss at will.
He also expressed concern that previous chairpersons of INEC have largely compromised their integrity, with only one or two exceptions who have performed commendably.
“However, if the powers currently held by the president are transferred to an independent body, meaning that the INEC chairman would no longer be accountable to the president, we could begin to witness a semblance of credible elections in this country.
“The chairpersons of INEC have consistently been under the president's influence, who dictates the course of action. The former chairpersons, including the current one, have often conformed to the expectations of those who appointed them, which should not be the case.”
It is essential for them to operate autonomously and prioritize the welfare of all Nigerians rather than serving the interests of a select few. This lack of independence has hindered the possibility of conducting credible elections in Nigeria.
However, should this change occur, it would pave the way for a new era of electoral integrity in the country.
The various manipulations that have historically plagued our electoral system would be relegated to history, allowing Nigeria to serve as a model for other nations in the realm of fair and credible elections, he stated.
No comments:
Post a Comment