Matters arising from INEC/stakeholders 3rd quarterly parley

EMEKA NZE reports that last week’s  Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) third quarterly meeting with stakeholders, essentially, to prepare grounds for the Anambra governorship election provided critical expositions, significantly, on the commission’s resolve to forge ahead with technological innovations capable of deepening Nigeria’s electoral process 

The meeting is usually held with the political parties, select Civil Society Organisations, the media and the Inter Agency Consultative Committee on Election Security (ICCES). 
The media only covers the openings usually held separately with the stakeholders instead of being excused as was the practice were asked to remain and give coverage to INEC’s demonstration of latest innovations used for the Continuous Voter Registration (CVR).
The new technology is Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS), said to be a dual verification of the face and fingerprints of a voter. m


To this end the INEC chair explained: “The functionality of the Z-pad has now been integrated into the IVED currently used for voter registration. On election day, the same device will used for the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) for fingerprint authentication during accreditation and where it fails for facial authentication. 
“We believe that this multi-layer process will eliminate the possibility of voting by identity theft using another person’s PVC. Where the voter fails both the fingerprint and facial authentication, he/she will not be allowed to vote. In other words, no electronic authentication, no voting. We are convinced that the new machine is robust enough to further guarantee the credibility of voter authentication and transparent management of results during elections.”
While demonstrating the new technology, INEC’s Director of ICT, Engr. Chidi Nwafor, said the voter would be authenticated by verifying his face or finger print before he is allowed to vote, adding that the innovation is faster and less time consuming unlike the Smart Card Reader device which allows for long queues.
Aside the new technology, INEC also told political parties of further preparedness for the November 6 governorship election in Anambra state.
Prof Yakubu stated, “When the commission released the timetable and schedule of activities eight months ago on 19th January this year, we informed Nigerians that the election will hold on 6th November 2021. 
“Today, it is exactly two months (or 60 days) to the election. As you are aware, the commission devolved the CVR to the 326 registration areas (or wards) in addition to the 21 Local Government offices and the state office of the commission. 
“The physical exercise was suspended yesterday, i.e. 60 days to the election as required by Section 9(5) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended). However, the online pre-registration option will continue to be available but no appointment for completion of registration can be scheduled until after the election.
“The Commission will use the next few weeks to compile the register of voters for claims and objections, clean up the data, print the PVCs for collection by registrants and compile the register for each of the 5,720 polling units in the state
According to INEC chairman, Prof Mahmood Yakubu, “The BVAS will now perform the functions of both the SCR and Z-Pad in the bye-election. Thereafter, it will be deployed in the Anambra governorship election in November.”
Of all these highlights, INEC determination and resolve to continue to evolve technologies that will facilitate the electoral processes was unmistakable and interest-evoking.
When the Senate, in what is now been perceived as its usual hypocritical posturing, shutdown the INEC clause of electronic transmission of results, under the guise of lack of or presence of “adequate coverage and effective working of network”, little did it realise that the upper legislative chamber was stirring the hornets nest. 
The barrage of criticism that followed that action bespoke of the already known view in the public domain that this 9th NASS “cannot sell used cars to Nigerians”. 
But that was before INEC realised that as an independent body, established by law, to oversee the conduct of elections in the country, it can carry out its functions without necessarily seeking approval from any quarter. 
It was therefore heartening that the last week’s INEC stakeholders meeting provided reliable and hope-restoring expositions that even though the political class may prefer a tardy, snail-speed and anachronistic electoral process, Nigerians prefer a digital system in consonance with the 21 century. 
At the meeting with media stakeholders, President of the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ), Comrade Chris Isiguzo called for complete digitalisation.

“Democracies in the world have embraced digitisation, not at piecemeal,” he said.

Also INEC maintained that it does not require the approval of any agency of government to carry out its functions as the country’s electoral body. 
Rather, the commission stated that accordong to section 160 of the constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria, it  has the powers to impose duties on any other government agency to carry out its procedures.
While responding to questions from media executives, National Commission in charge of Electoral Operations, Prof Okechukwu Ibeano stated that it’s absolutely unconstitutional by the National Assembly to subject INEC to clearing with the National Communications Commission (NCC) before it can transmit election results electronically.
He stated that Section 160 of Nigeria’s constitution has done everything that it needs to done to guarantee the independence of INEC, adding that what was left is for INEC to use the powers it has under the constitution.
Ibeano explained that “it was really in the context of the entire debate about ensuring the true independence of the commission that those who framed this were essentially propelled by the need to ensure that the commission is independent.
“Now let me then tie this to this whole subjection by the NASS that to transmit results electronically INEC has to clear with the NCC. That is absolutely unconstitutional. You cannot say that INEC to transmit election results has to get the approval of another agency of government when actually it has powers to impose duties on NCC to achieve the transmission of electronic results. 
“So this is my reading of section 160 and I completely agree with you that in the context of underscoring the independence of the commission, section 160 has done everything that it needs to do. What is left is for INEC to use the powers it has under the constitution.”
“One of the issues is section 160 of the constitution of Nigeria. You are absolutely right because that first alteration of 2010 is definitely profound but the point is that you can read it minimally or you can read it maximally. It essentially talks about two things, the powers of the commission, to by rules or otherwise, regulate its own activities and secondly the powers of the commission to impose duties on any officer or authority in the land for the purposes of carrying out its functions.
“Now if this is read maximally and I must say that I’m one of the maximalists, this is really extensive in terms of the powers of the commission under the constitution to organise and condition elections and cognate activities around the election. What this means and I will come back to the second part of it which is the power to confer or impose duties on any office or authority in the land in relation to this whole question of transmission of results. 
“So if we read this maximally, and I think we should, because if you look at the history of that amendment, it was really in the context of the entire debate about ensuring the true independence of the commission. 
“That was the context which means that those who framed this were essentially propelled by the need to ensure that the commission is independent. 
“It was in that context and so there can only be for me a maximalist reading of this. But if you read this minimally, the first part is clear, that the commission has powers to by rules or regulations regulate its own procedures without reference to the President or to anybody. 
“So that is clear. But then when you come to the part of imposing functions or imposing duties on officers, if you read that carefully, it is still subject to the approval of the President and that is why subsection 1 of that 160 says subject to subsection 2, because if you look at sub section 2, INEC cannot impose duties on any official of the state government without the approval of the governor. 
“So that would suggest to me that for INEC to impose on any official of the federal government, the President has to approve. However, when it comes to making rules to regulate it’s own procedures, it is not subject to anybody. 
“Now let me then tie this to this whole subjection by the National Assembly (NASS) that to transmit results electronically INEC has to clear with the NCC. That is absolutely unconstitutional. 
“You cannot say that INEC to transmit election results has to get the approval of another agency of government when actually it has powers to impose duties on NCC to achieve the transmission of electronic results. 
“So this is my reading of section 160 and I completely agree with you that in the context of underscoring the independence of the commission, section 160 has done everything that it needs to do. What is left is for INEC to use the powers it has under the constitution”, Ibeano said.
To this end, more Nigerians are already applauding INEC for the pilot of electronic process of BVAS with the Isoko 1state constituency elections in Delta state last Saturday.  
The PDP after a meeting of its Governors Forum, in statement by its -National Publicity Secretary Kola Ologbondiyan Tuesday wrote: The forum clearly stated that the Senate version which subjects the decision of INEC to deploy electronic transmission to the decision of the Nigerian Communications Commission and National Assembly is “manifestly a usurpation of the powers of INEC and offends relevant provisions of the Nigerian Constitution that guarantees INEC’s autonomy and independence”.
The statement further stated, “The forum recognises that INEC has demonstrated the capacity to transmit votes electronically, both in recent off season elections and with the introduction and deployment of the Biomodel Voters Accreditation System (BVAs), used in the recent bye-election in Delta state.
Another interesting highlight of the third quarterly stakeholders meeting last week was the worry expressed by the commission on how its job has been made difficult by the judgments from courts of coordinate jurisdiction obtained by political parties in the nomination of their candidates. 
 Prof Yakubu noted: “I cannot conclude my remarks without touching on the issue of litigations, particularly the conflicting orders emanating from Courts of coordinate jurisdiction. I am aware that some of the cases are still in Court and therefore sub judice. 
“I must say that some of the decided cases are making our work difficult and we have been crying out loud for a long time. In particular, some pre-election litigations relating to the nomination of candidates for elections were not determined until after the elections.
“Consequently, in some instances, political parties were declared winners without candidates to immediately receive the Certificates of Return on account of protracted and conflicting litigations or where Courts rather than votes determine winners of elections. 
 “This situation is compounded by cases on the leadership of political parties, thereby making the exercise of our regulatory responsibilities difficult. 


“It appears that in a number of electoral cases in Nigeria today, the settled law is now unsettled and the time-honoured principle of Stare decisis does not seem to matter any longer. 
“What is most disconcerting for us is that the more INEC strives to improve the credibility and transparency of our electoral process, the more extraneous obstacles are put in our way through litigations. 
“However, the Commission appreciates the recent statement by His Lordship the Chief Justice of Nigeria as well as the strongly worded concern by the Nigerian Bar Association. We will work with both the Bar and the Bench to defend the electoral process in the best interest of our democracy. 

“By the same token, as Chairmen and leaders of political parties, you have a role to play. I wish to remind you that INEC is both an umpire and a regulator. The Commission is an umpire in dealing even-handedly with political parties collectively, but when it comes to the management of intra-party affairs, it is a regulator. We will play our role decisively”, INEC chairman said.