Eu report on 2023 election.
Nigeria’s 2023 general elections, including the presidential, National Assembly, governorship, and state houses of assembly elections, have taken place, but the discussions and impact are still ongoing.
After the elections, including the presidential election, and the subsequent declaration by the Independent National Electoral Commission of Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the candidate of the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, as the winner, there have been ongoing discussions and debates about the process.
Read Also JAMB detected 178 malpractices in 2022/23 –examination
The two major opposition parties, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the Labour Party (LP), along with their presidential candidates, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi, respectively, as well as a few other political parties, have expressed their disagreement with the outcome of the elections. They have taken their concerns to the Presidential Elections Petitions Tribunal to seek resolution.
It is worth noting that a significant number of Nigerians, especially the younger generation who participated in the electoral process for the first time, expressed disappointment with the high level of violence that occurred.
The elections have been described by some local and international observer missions as not meeting the minimum standard of what free, fair, and credible elections should be.
However, the APC has stated that the exercise was deemed credible and accurately represented the desires of the people.
As the tribunal’s decision is being awaited, discussions on the election outcome have been reignited with the recent release of the final report on the findings by the European Union Election Observation Mission (EU-EOM) regarding the February 25 and March 18 elections.
The EU-EOM, which operated in Nigeria from January 11 to April 11, 2023, had 110 accredited observers from 25 EU member states, as well as Norway, Switzerland, and Canada.
They were in Nigeria at the request of the country’s electoral umpire, the INEC.
According to the Chief Observer of the Mission and member of the European Parliament, Barry Andrews, the Mission presented its findings and recommendations after a three-month-long observation across Nigeria.
The report, which he mentioned was in line with the EU-EOM’s typical procedure, highlighted that deficiencies in law and electoral administration impeded the organisation of efficient and inclusive elections and affected trust in the INEC.
The Mission, however, provided 23 recommendations for the Nigerian authorities to consider as a way to enhance future elections in Nigeria.
“We have identified six areas that require reforms, which we consider to be priority recommendations. If these reforms are implemented, they could potentially contribute to improvements in the conduct of future elections,” Andrews stated.
Read Also Naira to Dollar black market exchange rate today, July 4, 2023
According to the report, the six priority recommendations are focused on improving various aspects of the electoral process. These include clarifying any uncertainties in the law, implementing a transparent selection process for INEC members, ensuring timely publication and access to election results, enhancing protection for media practitioners, addressing gender discrimination in politics, and tackling the issue of impunity among electoral officers.
Andrews emphasised the importance of political will in Nigeria to achieve better democratic practises. He highlighted that it is crucial for all stakeholders to engage in dialogue on electoral reforms.
“The European Union is willing to assist Nigerian stakeholders in the implementation of these recommendations,” he stated.
The report was received with a variety of reactions.
While the presidency and many supporters of the ruling APC expressed scepticism about the report, describing it as biassed and fraudulent, other Nigerians welcomed it, stating that it simply confirmed what many Nigerians already believed about the elections. Since the report was released a few days ago, there have been varying opinions on the matter.
In response to the report, the presidency, represented by the Special Adviser to the President on Special Duties, Communication and Strategy, Dele Alake, issued a statement dismissing it as an effort to mock the Nigerian electoral system and the INEC.
The statement mentioned that there were concerns about the processes used to produce the report and the parameters used by the body, which raised questions about its ability to conduct reliable monitoring.
Alake claimed that the EU-EOM had shown bias prior to the elections, suggesting that the report was compiled to support their pre-existing bias against the system.
The presidency, therefore, disagreed with the report as it felt it did not accurately represent the complete picture of the election, particularly the presidential election.
It was also stated that the body could only send 40 observers to the 36 states of the federation and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. Additionally, the report was based on incidents from less than 1000 polling units out of 176,000 polling units.
It also stated that the 2023 general elections were considered to be the most neutral and credible in the country since the start of the current democracy in 1999.
Part of the statement from the presidency read: “Considering the level of personnel deployed, which was only about one person per state, we question how EU-EOM effectively monitored elections in over 176,000 polling units across Nigeria.”
We are interested in understanding the process behind the EU’s conclusions in the final report, considering the limited coverage of the elections by their observers. It is important to ascertain the extent to which they relied on various sources such as rumours, hearsay, social media commentaries, and opposition statements.
We believe that the final report on our recent elections, as stated by EU-EOM, may have been based on limited information and focused primarily on a small number of incidents in less than 1,000 polling units out of the total 176,000 units where Nigerians cast their votes on Election Day.
We have reasons to believe that the report, based on the views of fewer than 50 observers, was intended to support the same denunciatory stance contained in the EU’s preliminary report released in March.
We reject any notion or idea suggesting that the 2023 election was fraudulent.
The presidency, on the other hand, stated that it was pleased that other observers from various local and international organisations, which it considered credible, had confirmed that the recent general elections were the most free since 1999.
However, some analysts believe that President Tinubu may not have needed to concern himself with the EU-EOM’s report as he was not directly responsible for conducting the elections.
As a participant in the elections, it is their opinion that INEC and former President Muhammadu Buhari, not Tinubu, would have been more suitable to respond to the report since they were the ones involved with the conduct of the election.
One individual who shares this perspective is Lemmy Ughegbe, a journalist and public affairs analyst.
He mentioned his surprise at the response of Tinubu and his team to the report, stating that it was merely a repetition of what the Nigerian civil society organisation’s situation room had previously published as their findings on the election.
I have concerns because Tinubu, who was a candidate, did not oversee the elections. So, why should he consider participating in this discussion when it is the responsibility of INEC and Buhari, of course, to handle it? It is not his responsibility as he did not oversee the elections. They suggest that he should focus solely on matters of governance.
He stated: “The concern in all of these is that Tinubu, on inauguration day and afterwards, has spoken as if the election was flawless, which may not accurately reflect the reality, and may be disappointing to Nigerians who took part in the elections and observed the process.”
The National Assembly elections and the presidential elections were held concurrently. The INEC officials successfully uploaded real-time election results for the National Assembly. However, a glitch occurred when it came to the presidential elections.
The concern with Tinubu and his associates labelling the election as perfect is that it may lead to a decline in the quality of future elections. Acknowledging the flaws and shortcomings is crucial in order to address any issues. No human endeavour is flawless, but Tinubu and his associates claim that theirs is without imperfections.
I am concerned that individuals like Dele Alake may not realise that their response could contribute to the ongoing controversy. If they had chosen not to speak about it, the situation would have resolved itself.
It is concerning and reminds one of Nigeria’s patriot, the late Umar Musa Yar’adua, who, on his inauguration day in 2007, acknowledged the presence of irregularities in the elections that led to his presidency. He expressed his commitment to initiating electoral reforms.
That is how one might speak on a matter like this. The work of human endeavour is often imperfect; Tinubu and his associates, including Alake, claim that the elections were flawless. They had some imperfections, such as irregularities, including instances of voter suppression.
The LP has also responded through its national publicity secretary, Obiora Ifoh, stating that the report is reliable and represents the genuine stance of the majority of the voters.
He described the Presidency’s attempt to discredit the report as an attempt at face-saving.
Additionally, the PDP’s presidential candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, expressed his support for the report that suggests the election was rigged in favour of Tinubu, as stated by his Special Assistant on Public Communication, Frank Shibu.
He acknowledged the report stating that the election was affected by irregularities and did not meet the minimum standards of credibility.
According to Shaibu, it was widely believed that the last elections lacked credibility. The electoral body has not yet provided an explanation for the delay in uploading the full election results on its viewing portal, even after nearly five months. Even primary school children who did not vote have expressed their opinions that INEC did not perform well and that there were allegations of election rigging by Tinubu in the last elections.
Shaibu questioned the government’s decision to accept billions of dollars from the EU as an election fund while also expressing scepticism towards the body’s comment.
He mentioned that the EU provided training for the INEC staff and donated equipment for the INEC to conduct the polls. Why did Alake argue that the EU lacks the authority to speak, despite being the largest single donor to the INEC? It would be better for Mr. Alake to remain silent instead of attempting to justify the unjustifiable.
The publisher of CNK news and public affairs analysts, Chris Nwandu, was not surprised by the presidency’s reaction, as it was expected.
The government may not be inclined to commend the report, as they are involved in the contested election that is being discussed.
Many organisations, including the situation room led by Madam N. Obi and comprising various CSOs, have described the elections as being slow.
What was said? It has been stated that, in contrast to INEC’s promise, the presidential election result was not uploaded in real time. This statement is based on the fact that even INEC has not disputed it.
However, according to the presidential spokesperson, Alake, the Federal Government’s stance is that the infractions in approximately 10,000 polling units should not be used to invalidate the results of over 176,000 polling units.
So, according to him, 10,000 is not considered high enough and the figure exceeds the mentioned 10,000. The statement made was that the election was flawed, and anyone who disagrees may be avoiding the truth.
He expressed a different opinion about the presidency, stating, “These observers are impartial; the EU observers are not Nigerians, they came to oversee the election and submitted their report afterwards.”
What was expected of the government was to acknowledge the result and explore ways to prevent such infractions from occurring in the future.
The INEC should carefully review the report provided by various election observers, including the EU, to gain a comprehensive understanding.
