…NASS presiding officers accused of rigging voice votes
Nigerias long journey to a consolidated democracy where there will be credible and transparent elections appears to be under threat.
It would appear that elected representatives of the people who have found themselves in leadership positions at the National Assembly are putting the gavel to use negatively, defeating the main essence of the instrument.
The rush with which the presiding officers at the Senate and the House of Representatives chant the ayes have it or the nays have it appears to suggest that in many occasions they do not even hear correctly what is being said. Their chants and hitting of the gavel depend on what they want to achieve in any circumstance.
They always have their way, to the detriment of the entire country, as the hitting of the gavel signals the conclusion of a matter on the floor of the house.
According to Wikipedia, a gavel is a small ceremonial mallet commonly made of hardwood, typically fashioned with a handle. It can be used to call for attention or to punctuate rulings and proclamations and is a symbol of the authority and right to act officially in the capacity of a presiding officer.
It is often struck against a sound block, a striking surface typically also made of hardwood, to enhance its sound qualities.
Wikipedia noted that, according to tradition, Vice President John Adams used a gavel as a call to order in the first U.S. Senate in New York in the spring of 1789. Since then, it has remained customary to tap the gavel against a lectern or desk to indicate the opening and closing of proceedings and to indicate that the judges decision is final. It is also used to keep the meeting itself calm and orderly.
Apart from the listed noble uses of the gavel, it would seem that the use of the instrument has been politicised in Nigeria, as presiding officers now allegedly employ it to achieve a pre-determined outcome.
Nigeria and the world might have watched with amazement as Deputy Speaker, House of Representatives and Chairman of Committee of the Whole in the House, Ahmed Idris Wase recently hit the gavel twice to uphold the fainted voice votes of the anti-electronic transmission of election results proponents as against the thunderous votes of the pro-electronic transmission lawmakers during consideration of the Electoral Act Amendment Bill.
All was going well during the clause-by-clause consideration of the report on the Electoral Bill with members proposing and adopting amendments where necessary from clause 1-51, when all of a sudden, conviviality turned into acrimony when Clause 52, section of the Bill which deals with electronic transmission of election results was read out by the Deputy Speaker who presided over the consideration.
Out of the cacophony of voices calling for amendments to the clause was the Deputy Minority leader of the House, Toby Okechukwu who proposed that electronic transmission of election results be inserted and made compulsory in the Bill.
Okechukwu moved that Clause 52 (2) be amended to read that: Voting and transmission of results shall be by electronic transmission. His motion for the amendment was seconded by the Deputy Chief Whip of the House, Nkeiruka Onyejeocha (APC, Abia) and it was subjected to a voice vote by Wase.
When it was put to a voice vote, the motion received a deafening ayes but Wase ruled that the shallow nays shouts had it, throwing the House into disarray with protesting lawmakers making awkward movements.
The Deputy Speaker did not hide his opposition to electronic transmission of votes when he argued that the entire country was not yet covered by broadband and as such, there would be issues with electronic transmission of results.
This gave the All Progressives Congress (APC)-dominated House teeth to pass the Electoral Act Amendment Bill without explicit provision for electronic transmission of votes except for the controversial section 52(2) which makes it optional.
The Houses action was without recourse to INEC, which is actually the body saddled with the responsibility of conducting elections and not NCC. The Commission had shortly after the passage of the Bill reiterated its earlier position on National Television that it has the capacity for electronic transmission of results from remote areas of the country.
The wrong use of the gavel, which edged out the electronic transmission of election results may have ruined Nigerias democracy in no small measure as future exercise such as the 2023 general election is open to manipulations and other forms of electoral frauds experienced in the 2019 national polls and other off-season elections.
The 2019 elections were reported to have been characterised by high incidences of violence, manipulations, rigging, ballot box snatching, disruption at collation centres, vote-buying and inconclusive polls which electronic means would have checked to a large extent.
Reports from local and international observer groups including the European Union Election Observation Mission (EU EOM), International Republican Institute (IRI) and National Democratic Institute (NDI), Civil Society Situation Room and Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD) expressed serious reservations over the conduct of the 2019 general elections with regards to non-credibility.
The EU EOMs final report on the 2019 elections for instance, observed that lack of transparency and inconsistent numbers during the collation of results by INEC cast a long shadow over the integrity of the 2019 elections.
Also, the Nigeria Civil Society Situation Room, in its report lamented that the 2019 general elections did not meet the threshold for free, fair and credible elections.
The report indicated that: There were differences between the number of accredited voters and the total number of votes cast in many Polling Units. The INEC operations fell short of its identified role.
A Director, Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD), Idayat Hassan, argues that the prohibition of transmission of votes electronically would yield ground for the manipulation of results in future elections.
As long-standing election monitors, CDD West Africa, have observed the chaos associated with manual elections collating, which are often messy, incoherent and susceptible to manipulations by individuals and political parties, Hassan stated.
