EKITI ELECTIONS: What If? By Bunmi Makinwa
After the results from the Ekiti Governorship Elections were
announced and Mr Ayodele Fayose, the candidate of the People’s
Democratic Party (PDP), was declared the winner of the June 21
governorship elections in Ekiti State 2014, various opinions, both
positive and negative, on the re-election of the former governor were
expressed.
The undermentioned article was written Bunmi Makinwa, who works
as a communication for leadership entrepreneur. He was formerly Africa
Regional Director of United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). There she
expresses her personal view on the gubernatorial elections in Ekiti
state, its aftermath, relationships between gubernatorial candidates,
voters and democracy in Nigeria. Statements made and opinions expressed
in the article represent the views of the author and do not necessarily
reflect the opinion of the Naij.com.
It started like a rolling thunder. But it ended almost like a lullaby. Lyrics of democracy on the mend.
It could not have been predicted that the gubernatorial election in
Ekiti state would end the way it did. No, it is not the loss by Governor
Fayemi. Not even the victory by Governor-elect Fayose. It is the
genteel, no-victor-no-vanquished, I-am-your- brother and you-are-a-saint
embrace of both Fayemi and Fayose that has created this surreal
atmosphere. Even Labour Party gubernatorial candidate Bamidele Opeyemi,
despite his mega loss, had no anger.
Just a few days prior to the election, the campaign leaders of the
political parties could not find words harsh enough to describe their
opponents. Violence, unrelenting and ascending, continually seized
Ekiti, and tension enveloped a people who were well known for their hard
headedness. Incumbent Governor Fayemi cried out that even his life was
threatened when police bullets were shot in his direction whilst in a
convoy.
Applause has greeted the comportment of Fayemi for his acceptance of
defeat with no rancor. He has even said that he would not contest the
election. It is an unusual departure from after-act of political
elections of which he profited in a court decision against his immediate
predecessor, Governor Oni. Shortly after the recent election, Fayemi
met with Fayose and they appear to be orchestrating a smooth,
hugging-friendly transition of power. Analysts have gone to town to
explain why Fayemi lost and Fayose won, or to assert that actually it
was Ekiti people who won in their decision, and that democracy is the
real victor.
Whilst democracy is desirable and people should freely express their
wish and will, some of the events and happenings in Ekiti just before
and during the election raised questions on how democracy is nurtured.
Democracy may be universal in meaning but its application is not the
same in each setting. Nor does it follow a preset plan in all cases.
Where visible signs of un-democratic tenets appear, it behoves the
people to point it out and correct it, lest it becomes a cankerworm that
afflicts society and ruins it.
The election in Ekiti should not be remembered only for the smooth
transition that appears to be underway. There is more to it, and its
lessons should not be buried in the ovation, much as it is welcomed. The
fighting that accompanied the electoral campaigns was massive and it
kept growing. Killings were reported. The state was heated up and scare
stories were many. Some opinion formers wrote that certain of the major
contestants in the gubernatorial election were arming seriously to
disrupt the election and make it impossible.
A situation would be created where government could no longer
function and constitutional measure would be taken to declare a state of
emergency and impose alternative administration in Ekiti state. Others
said that massive rigging apparatus had been embedded in the electoral
process and the outcome of the election was already a foregone
conclusion. Interestingly PDP and APC were cited respectively by various
analysts as intended beneficiaries of the two dire scenarios.
{read_more}
None of the horrific expectations happened on election day. There
was massive presence of military and police and other security services
in Ekiti state prior to, and during the election. Reports spoke of some
12,000 security personnel in the state. They took unprecedented
security measures. At least two governors were confirmed to have been
prevented from attending a political rally by APC. Some journalists were
refused coverage of the election and some political leaders were
arrested.
It is difficult for a casual observer to determine the right or wrong
of these actions. Media reports alone cannot come close to providing
the insight that security services have and that led them to take
actions as reported. Some protests have been heard from affected people.
But no claim has been made to characterize the actions as having
fundamentally affected the final count or announcement of results. More
importantly, judging by the outcome of their actions, the security
measures taken appear to have served the end – conduct of a peaceful
election where people’s votes decided the outcome.
Most reports to date appear to sing from the same hymn book. In fact,
reports from the media and observers were in agreement that the
election was peaceful and the process was overwhelmingly transparent.
The conclusion that must be drawn is that the results of the
gubernatorial election in Ekiti state represented the wish of the
people. According to a statement by Cleen Foundation on the conduct of
the Ekiti election, “There was very heavy deployment of security
personnel across the state for the election.
This occasioned significant restrictions of movement in some areas.
However, no major incidents of security breach were recorded and their
presence did not hinder the electoral process.” In the main the
impression is created that the heavy security and measure thereof
produced positive results. Given the calmness that prevailed, the
overall success of the voting procedures, and the acceptance of the
final results by all parties, the means that were used appear to justify
the end. But herein lies the problem. Paradoxically, the same kind of
security measures as were adopted in Ekiti can lead to different
outcomes.
Series of negative outcomes where peoples votes do not count and
where the authorities that control the security apparatus can decide the
result of elections as they desire. It is not a fantasy, it has
happened many times in Nigeria. It raises a fundamental question about
uses and abuses of security personnel for elections and how to minimize
and eliminate such misuse. Security personnel are trained and oriented
to obey orders. They maintain law and order, ostensibly in the best
interest of the nation. But security personnel are hardly privy to the
ultimate goal of the order which part they are enforcers. In a chain of
command each person or section fulfills its own ‘mandate’, as it were,
with the expectation that all will arrive at same end.
For example,what if the security personnel in Ekiti were merely an
extension of a powerful political party or persons and their actions
were aimed at undermining the wishes of the electorate? What if the
security personnel were to enforce a decision to make the election a
useless exercise?
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment