2006 Electoral Act and penalties for rigging

2006 Electoral Act and penalties for rigging 24/7/2008

What is the worth of a legislation that is not enforced? Deputy Political Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU re-examines the 2006 Electoral Act within the context of the elusive search for solutions to electoral malpractices outside the legal framework. What punishment for election riggers? To lawyers, it is no big puzzle. The challenge, they contend, is the obvious lack of will and capacity by the appropriate authorities to enforce the constitutional provisions on penalties for all forms of malpractices. The Electoral Act 2006 is not silent on the fate of desperate Nigerians who attempt to undermine or truncate democracy through dubious election. Part VIII of the Act dwells at length on Electoral offences and appropriate sanctions. Sixteen offences under the act constitute unruly electoral behaviours. Listed are offences in relation to registration and nominations, disorderly behaviour at political meetings; improper use of voters’ card and vehicles, impersonalisation and voting when not qualified, dereliction of duty, and bribery and conspiracy. There are also repercussions for breach of secret voting, wrongful voting and false statement, voting by unregistered person, disorderly conduct at election, poll-related offences, threatening, undue influence and recall offences. The examination of these punitive measures shows that before, during and after the election, the politicians, voters, electoral officers, security agents and other citizens stand before the mirror of law for behaviour regulation. However, since these provisions were not applied during the 2007 general elections and the re-run polls, they only exist for cosmetic reasons. The late Professor Jadesola Akande, a legal scholar had reflected on that vanity of legislation after making an oral submission to the Adebayo Williams-led Lagos State Electoral Reforms Committee at Ikeja. She observed that the Constitution and Electoral Act were only meaningful if their provisions were invoked after their breaches. "We have these penalties against rigging and other electoral vices. But, they are not enforced," she remarked. Critical to the enforcement of the laws against election-related offences are the Federal and state governments, and the police. But, owing to the synergy between the ruling parties and top echelon of the police to subvert the electoral process in favour of the highest bidder, the result is "business as usual." Rebellious politicians, many point out, carry on with the assault on the ballot box, because they were insulated from arrest and prosecution. The presidency offered the towering cover for the most ridiculous electoral arson during the Obasanjo years to the extent that when the Anambra State godfather, Chris Uba and his enstranged political godson, Chris Ngige owned up to rigging to retain the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in power, the police could not touch them. By 2007, the rigging which was supervised by the do-or-die president went out of hand. Ballot stuffing, box snatching, blood bath, falsification, kidnap of electoral officers and results assumed a more dangerous dimension, to the consternation of international observers, domestic monitors and electorate. President Umaru Yar’Adua who rode to power on the back of the flawed election promptly acknowledged the rot and promptly promised electoral reforms. The Presidential Electoral Reforms Panel headed by Mohammadu Uwais, the retired Chief Justice of the Federation has been collating opinions on the proposed assignment of reshaping the country’s electoral future. The suggestions by the individuals, groups and associations do not differ substantially on the existing legal punishment for electoral fraud. Nigeria’s march to democracy has been unduly slow. Only the transition to civil rule packaged by the military rule, except during the Babangida period, could be credited with a measure of success. Yet, many innovations that could propel the country forward democratically came up under the cunning regime. After the fall of the Second Republic, Military President Ibrahim Babangida who displaced Major-General Muhammadu Buhari set up the Babalakin Panel to investigate the rancorous 1983 general elections which ended in fiasco in some states where lives were lost and property damaged by the protesting voters. In its report, the panel identified major short-comings and abuses. On the compilation of voters register alone, the flaws ranged from compilation of fictitious names to illegal compilation of separate voters’ list, multiple registration of voters during the revision, illegal compilation of separate voters list and multiple registration of voters during the revision. Justice Bola Babalakin (rtd) also frowned at illegal printing of voters’ cards, registration of unqualified persons, illegal possession of ballot boxes, stuffing of ballot boxes with ballot papers, falsification of election results and voting by under-aged children. Other anormalies recorded were refusal to supply election materials, announcement of results where there were no elections, unauthorised announcement of results, harassment of candidates, agents or the electorate, change of list of electoral officials, tampering with figures and switching of votes, box snatching and inflation of figures. The commission recommended certain punishment to the Federal Electoral Commission (FEDECO) officials at state levels who compromised their positions by supporting the cause of parties and candidates on poll day. They were to be barred from holding public positions. Babalakin Panel also observed that political thuggery had become part of the electioneering campaign and strategies of the nation’s political parties. It therefore, recommended that government should consider passing legislations against political thuggery. In addition, it was recommended that at election times, special investigation units should be set up in the police that can give speedy attention to reported cases of election malpractices. The panel also recommended that the ministries of Justice should make special arrangements to expedite action on cases involving electoral malpractices. Besides, it suggested that special courts manned by magistrates and judges, serving or retired, should be set up to try the cases. There appears to be a particular linkage between the panel’s recommendations and the 2006 Electoral Act. In the course of political evolution,, the problems envisaged by the commission and the Act have refused to abate as a result of the tension created by the inordinate ambition for power and sit-tight syndrome. But, it would appear that the Act is a window dressing because operative content has not been given to the provisions, either by government, police or the private citizens. In the same vein, no deprived politician, relations of victims of political assassinations, thuggery and mayhem during electioneering have sought for the application of the relevant sections of the Act to serve as deterrents to potential thugs. Culprits, for example, are liable on conviction to a maximum fine of N100,000 or to 12 month imprisonment or both under Section 124. Under this Section, the offences relate to registration. It covers false statements to the registration officers, impersonation, obstruction or registration and revision or registration in a wrong constituency. Offences under Section 125 attract jail or financial penalty. Included in the list are forgery of nomination, ballot and other official papers. The convicted is liable to the sum of N200,000. Similarly, the illegal printing of ballot papers, possession of ballot boxes and storage attracts a fine of N500,000 or five year imprisonment. Unruly behaviour at political meetings even attract a N100,000 fine or 12 month imprisonment. A voter found with voters card, buys, sells or procures voters’ card is not expected to go scot free. Upon conviction, he is liable to N100,000 fine or 12 month imprisonment or both. There is no leniency for unpatriotic electoral officers. Under Sectioin 130. Late coming to the polling booths in unpardonable. It attracts N100,000 or 12 month imprisonment because it is viewed as dereliction of duty. According to the Act, any person who announces or publishes an election result knowing same to be false or which is at variance with the signed certificate or return commits an offence and is liable on conviction to 36 months imprisonment." More importantly, "any person who delivers or causes to be delivered a false certificate of return knowing same to be false to any news media commits an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for three years." Under Section 131, bribery and conspiracy to commit electoral atrocities attract a year imprisonment or fine of N100,000. "A voter commits an offence of bribery who before or during an election directly or indirectly himself or by any other person on his behalf, receives, agrees or contracts for any money, gift, loan or valuable consideration, office, place or employment for himself, or for any other person, for voting or agreeing to vote or for refraining or agreeing to refrain from voting at any such election," the Act added. On election day, it is prohibited to canvass for votes, solicit for vote, persuade voters to vote and not to vote for a particular candidate, shout slogans and be in possession of offensive weapons, party dress and symbol. The penalty is N50,000 fine or six months imprisonment.