Perils of LG Electoral Commission

NIGERIA’S brittle federalism is under a serious threat. After a dubious Supreme Court judgement granted financial autonomy to the 774 local governments, anti-federalist forces are at it again. This time, it comes in the form of a bill in the Senate that has passed the first reading. Sponsored by the Chairman, Committee on Finance, Sani Musa (APC, Niger East), the ‘Local Government Independent Electoral Commission (Establishment) Bill, 2024’ is to establish a federal agency to conduct LG elections. This is preposterous.

It is a power grab, another assault on federalism, without which Nigeria faces existential threats. Indeed, elections are local, and it is absurd that the centre tries to impose its whims on the federating units at all costs.

Before now, Section 197(c) and the Third Schedule 4 (B) of the 1999 Constitution vest in the State Independent Election Commission powers to organise LG polls. In the Third Schedule Part II (F), the Constitution established the Independent National Electoral Commission to organise general elections. This is sensible because Nigeria is supposed to operate in federalism.

Among others, the President will appoint the chairperson and members of the NILGEC to conduct elections every four years. This is not an antidote to dodgy elections. It grants omnibus power to the centre, which is open to abuse. It is simply replacing the tyranny of the state governor with that of the President, who wields enormous power already.

Moreover, the President is not an independent observer in LG elections, and his partisan leaning toward his political party might taint his appointments to the NILGEC. This should be avoided at all costs. It is a minus that the President wields overarching powers in the appointments to the INEC board.

Over the years, the major complaint is that some state governments do not conduct LG polls regularly. Instead, they impose illegal caretaker committees on LGs. In the states that organise elections, the polls are notoriously one-sided. These are strong arguments, but weak for a federal body to take over the conduct of LG polls in a federal polity.

First, the polls conducted by INEC are also tainted by rigging, ballot stuffing, violence, and logistics issues. Recent general elections have recorded low voter turnout – the election that brought in Bola Tinubu as President in February 2023 recorded a paltry 27 per cent voter turnout. INEC-organised elections are marred by pre- and post-election litigation.

A note by Kimpact Development Initiative said 1,209 petitions were filed after the 2023 general elections. This is a deluge, costing INEC and the petitioners millions to prosecute. Worse, even the off-season governorship elections reach the Supreme Court.

Second, the NILGEC is anti-federalist; it advances the unitary form of government. In a country with over 250 ethnic nationalities, this is perilous. It undermines the crusade for restructuring.

Third, with the economic situation, it is unwise because it creates another cost centre. It advances the big government syndrome. Nigeria has 1,316 MDAs according to the Federal Civil Service Commission. The Federal Government has tabled a bill to establish the Ministry of Livestock. Although Tinubu pledged to implement the Steve Oronsaye report, the NILGEC repudiates this.

Unlike in other decent polities, Nigerian lawmakers do not link the creation of MDAs to a funding source. This is bad governance ethos.

Nigerians are losing interest in democracy. Therefore, the National Assembly should discard the bill. Lawmakers should concentrate on reviving and deepening federalism. This is the way out of the country’s political woes.

The state governments should unite against any bill that further constricts their sphere of constitutional influence in this warped federal arrangement. Since this is a constitutional issue, states’ parliaments should refuse the bidding of the federal lawmakers.