11 - The Promise and Problems of Electoral Reforms

Summary

Introduction

A remarkable feature of Nigeria's democratic development in the Fourth Republic is the overwhelming and persistent desire for electoral reforms. The yearning for reforms, which tends to spike after every general election, can be linked to the failure and disillusionment that follow elections in the country. Calls for electoral reforms were made soon after the Fourth Republic was inaugurated. The 1999 transition elections, which were conducted under difficult legal and political environments, provided the impetus for early demands for electoral reforms (Mustapha 1999; Olurode and Anifowose 2004). Drawing on their assessment of the polls, election observation groups – the Carter Center and the National Democratic Institute (NDI) – advised that ‘both Nigerian civil society and the new government should explicitly commit to achieve electoral reforms before the next round of elections’ (Carter Center and NDI 1999: 9).

While the newly inaugurated government in 1999 appeared to have welcomed the calls for electoral reforms, it interpreted them in narrow legal terms. The government perceived electoral reforms strictly as involving legislative review and, as such, the National Assembly naturally assumed the responsibility of drafting an electoral law to guide the conduct of future elections. The making of the Electoral Act 2001 was sadly embroiled in controversy, precisely because many stakeholders saw the process as non-inclusive and non-transparent (Oluyemi-Kusa 2001). Consequently, after the law was passed, it was challenged by the state governments on the basis that it infringed on the constitutional powers of the State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIECs). The ruling of the Supreme Court on the matter led to the repeal of the Act and its re-enactment as Electoral Act 2002. Similarly, the 2002 Electoral Act was opposed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and some political parties on the grounds that the National Assembly overreached its power by determining the order of elections and that the Act violated the rights and privileges granted political parties in the Constitution. This led to the amendment of the Act in 2003 (Akinduro 2014). The controversial Electoral Act 2002, with the 2003 amendment, provided the legal framework for the conduct of the 2003 general election.

Dissatisfaction with the electoral law and the conduct of the 2003 general elections sparked new calls for electoral reforms.