Editorial

Electoral Act, Making Votes Count

Published

4 years ago

March 11, 2022

Since President Muhammadu Buhari assumed office as Nigeria’s President on May 29, 2015, he had gone
back and forth with the National Assembly on amendments to the crucial Electoral Act. The macabre dance finally ended when he approved 10 alterations to Nigeria’s 2010 electoral law, creating legal safeguards for more transparent voting and collation processes.
Nigeria, Africa’s most populous country, is gearing up for a high-strung general election next February, with some of its outstanding politicians already thrusting themselves into what could result in a fierce campaign season. And while that may be impressive enough, the African giant has now fastened electoral laws, raising anxieties and demonstrating that it can hold elections that are widely seen as credible for the first time in years.
This is an amazing development in a country categorised low on civil liberties, where elections are often prone to extensive vote manipulation and voter arm-twisting. Remarkably, the new emendations give the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) more decision-making powers and reserves early funding for it to avoid the incommodious technical and logistical lags that led to the rescheduling of the 2019 election which disenfranchised some voters in the end.
Perhaps, most fundamentally, the law also furnishes legal support for the use of electronic card readers for accreditation and the electronic transmission of results for collation in Section 50. This gives INEC the legal authorisation for the electronic transmission of election results, a sticking point for some politicians who believe the decrepit state of the country’s telecommunications system could hinder voting in certain areas. Hopefully, it will extensively abate the machination of Nigerian elections.
Conversely, members of civil society groups reckon that the card reader, first used in the 2015 election, aided transparency and diminished the incidence of string pulling. But the admissibility of electronic data in court had been hotly debated because of a lack of legal support for the device. The new Act goes into effect immediately, indicating that INEC can test-run the rules this year, when Osun and Ekiti States in the South-West will hold gubernatorial elections.
Following approval of the bill, President Buhari said in a televised address to Nigerians on the night it was signed that it “could have a positive impact on Nigeria’s elections”, and added that the technological innovations provided “will safeguard citizens’ constitutional right and vote effectively”. But he campaigned vigorously as a clean politician during his successful presidential bid in 2015, yet, seemed very reluctant to assent to the bill.
The President had vetoed parts of the bill, returning it to parliament five times since 2015 and making it one of the longest-debated laws in Nigeria’s history. The rejections were often accompanied by requests for amendments. In one renunciation, Buhari cited grammatical errors. On another event, he impeded until a few months to the 2019 election before contending that it was too close to D-Day to evaluate the bill.
Last December, he asked the National Assembly to lift restrictions mandating parties to hold direct primary elections, rather than hand-pick favourites of more powerful party leaders. The lawmakers acquiesced but introduced more anti-manipulation measures into the bill. For example, when they took off the mandatory direct primaries provision, they added clauses that staved off political appointees from running for office or voting during primaries without giving up their current positions. This is entrenched in Section 84(12) of the Act.
It states: “No political appointee of any rank shall be a voting representative or be voted for at any party’s convention or for the nomination of a candidate for any election.” For Buhari, this provision constitutes a denial of the right to vote or be voted for at any political party’s convention. Before endorsing the bill, the President advised the legislators to revise the provision. Interestingly,the Senate has rejected to act on the request of President Buhari for an amendment of Section 84(12) of the newly assented Act.
Importantly, Section 50 allows INEC to determine the procedure for voting at an election as well as the transmission of results, either electronically or manually. Section 51(2) empowers the Presiding Officer at a polling unit to cancel the results of the election in the polling unit where the number of vote casts surpasses the number of accredited voters in the polling units. Furthermore, the time frame for campaigns by political parties has moved from 90 days to 150 days before the election. This is according to Section 94(1).
Another provision, Section 29(1), makes it a law for political parties to conduct their primaries and submit the list of candidates at least 180 days before the general elections from the previous 60 days. The list of candidates submitted must emerge from valid primaries conducted by the political party. This provision is particularly laudable as political parties have now been compelled to prepare for an early primary election in line with the guidelines.
Section 64(9) criminalises any act of false collation and declaration of results by a returning or collation officer. If a returning or collation officer intentionally collates and announces a false result, such a person commits an offence which is liable on conviction to a fine of N500,000 or imprisonment for a term of at least 3 years or both. In instances where INEC determines that such act was not done willingly or made contrary to the provisions of the law, regulations, guidelines, and manuals for the election, Section 65 gives the Commission the power to review such results.
INEC must be commended for making incremental improvements to the electoral system since 2015 when it first introduced the Permanent Voter Card and Smart Card Reader for elections. It has also upgraded the system to use the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System, a better technology that was deployed during the off-season November 6 governorship election in Anambra State.
Nigeria is crumbling at the seams. It has been significantly weakened by its poor electoral system that allows thieves, mediocres, and incompetent politicians to attain high offices. In many instances, instead of the will of the people prevailing, it is the increasingly tainted courts that determine the fate of Nigerians. Therefore, now that the Electoral Act has been amended, all stakeholders, particularly civil society organisations and the citizens, should rise for democracy, pointing the way forward.

Editorial

No To Political Office Holders’ Salary Hike

Published

2 days ago

September 22, 2025

Uchechukwu Okwum

Nigeria’s Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) has unveiled a gratuitous proposal to increase the salaries of political and public office holders in the country. This plan seeks to fatten the pay packets of the president, vice-president, governors, deputy governors, and members of the National and State Assemblies. At a time when the nation is struggling to steady its economy, the suggestion that political leaders should be rewarded with more money is not only misplaced but insulting to the sensibilities of the ordinary Nigerian.

What makes the proposal even more opprobrious is the dire economic condition under which citizens currently live. The cost of living crisis has worsened, inflation has eroded the purchasing power of workers, and the naira continues to tumble against foreign currencies. The majority of Nigerians are living hand to mouth, with many unable to afford basic foodstuffs, medical care, and education. Against this backdrop, political office holders, who already enjoy obscene allowances, perks, and privileges, should not even contemplate a salary increase.

It is, therefore, not surprising that the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has stepped in to challenge this development. SERAP has filed a lawsuit against the RMAFC to halt the implementation of this salary increment. This resolute move represents a voice of reason and accountability at a time when public anger against political insensitivity is palpable. The group is rightly insisting that the law must serve as a bulwark against impunity.

According to a statement issued by SERAP’s Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, the commission has been dragged before the Federal High Court in Abuja. Although a hearing date remains unconfirmed, the momentous step of seeking judicial redress reflects a determination to hold those in power accountable. SERAP has once again positioned itself as a guardian of public interest by challenging an elite-centric policy.

The case, registered as suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1834/2025, specifically asks the court to determine “whether RMAFC’s proposed salary hike for the president, vice-president, governors and their deputies, and lawmakers in Nigeria is not unlawful, unconstitutional and inconsistent with the rule of law.” This formidable question goes to the very heart of democratic governance: can those entrusted with public resources decide their own pay rises without violating the constitution and moral order?

In its pleadings, SERAP argues that the proposed hike runs foul of both the 1999 Nigerian Constitution and the RMAFC Act. By seeking a judicial declaration that such a move is unlawful, unconstitutional, and inconsistent with the rule of law, the group has placed a spotlight on the tension between self-serving leadership and constitutionalism. To trivialise such an issue would be harum-scarum, for the constitution remains the supreme authority guiding governance.

We wholeheartedly commend SERAP for standing firm, while we roundly condemn RMAFC’s selfish proposal. Political office should never be an avenue for financial aggrandisement. Since our leaders often pontificate sacrifice to citizens, urging them to tighten their belts in the face of economic turbulence, the same leaders must embody sacrifice themselves. Anything short of this amounts to double standards and betrayal of trust.

The Nigerian economy is not buoyant enough to shoulder the additional cost of a salary increase for political leaders. Already, lawmakers and executives enjoy allowances that are grossly disproportionate to the national average income. These earnings are sufficient not only for their needs but also their unchecked greed. To even consider further increments under present circumstances is egregious, a slap in the face of ordinary workers whose minimum wage remains grossly insufficient.

Resources earmarked for such frivolities should instead be channelled towards alleviating the suffering of citizens and improving the nation’s productive capacity. According to United Nations statistics, about 62.9 per cent of Nigerians were living in multidimensional poverty in 2021, compared to 53.7 per cent in 2017. Similarly, nearly 30.9 per cent of the population lives below the international poverty line of US$2.15 per day. These figures paint a stark picture: Nigeria is a poor country by all measurable standards, and any extra naira diverted to elite pockets deepens this misery.

Besides, the timing of this proposal could not be more inappropriate. At a period when unemployment is soaring, inflation is crippling households, and insecurity continues to devastate communities, the RMAFC has chosen to pursue elite enrichment. It is widely known that Nigeria’s economy is in a parlous state, and public resources should be conserved and wisely invested. Political leaders must show prudence, not profligacy.

Another critical dimension is the national debt profile. According to the Debt Management Office, Nigeria’s total public debt as of March 2025 stood at a staggering N149.39 trillion. External debt obligations also remain heavy, with about US$43 billion outstanding by September 2024. In such a climate of debt-servicing and borrowing to fund budgets, it is irresponsible for political leaders to even table the idea of inflating their salaries further. Debt repayment, not self-reward, should occupy their minds.

This ignoble proposal is insensitive, unnecessary, and profoundly reckless. It should be discarded without further delay. Public office is a trust, not an entitlement to wealth accumulation. Nigerians deserve leaders who will share in their suffering, lead by example, and prioritise the common good over self-indulgence. Anything less represents betrayal of the social contract and undermines the fragile democracy we are striving to build.

Editorial

No To Political Office Holders’ Salary Hike

Published

2 days ago

September 22, 2025

The Tide

Editorial

Rivers’ Retirees: Matters Arising

Published

2 weeks ago

September 8, 2025

The Tide

The Rivers State Government deserves commendation for the manner in which it conducted the last biometric exercise for pensioners in the state. For the first time in many years, the verification process was not only efficient but also humane, a development that has brought relief to a category of citizens that often bears the brunt of neglect.

Unlike previous verification exercises that left pensioners exhausted and unattended, the latest exercise set a refreshing precedent. Retirees were given proper and sumptuous meals, and in addition, the government paid the sum of N10,000 into their accounts to cushion their transportation costs. Such gestures go a long way in demonstrating that those who had laboured for the state are not forgotten in their twilight years.

The measure was particularly necessary given that some pensioners had to travel long distances to reach their verification centres. For elderly men and women, such journeys come with physical and financial strain. By recognising these realities and easing the burden, the government has shown that pensioners deserve dignity, not disdain.

Beyond this laudable act of consideration, the authorities must reflect on the very structure of pension verification. The era of compelling retirees to be physically present for routine verification should be reconsidered. With digital tools and innovation, the government can adopt systems that capture and confirm data without the stress of physical assembly. This is crucial for pensioners residing in other states or even abroad.

While we acknowledge the importance of verification in cleaning up pension records, we cannot ignore the darker side of the matter. It is regrettable that some allowances continue to be paid to deceased pensioners, with relatives fraudulently collecting the funds. The latest biometrics, thankfully, exposed some of these sharp practices. The exercise, therefore, is not only about order but also about justice.

We urge families of deceased pensioners to be patriotic enough to inform the government of the deaths of their loved ones. It is deeply shameful that in some instances, individuals attempted to impersonate late pensioners during the biometrics. Such behaviour undermines the spirit of honesty and deprives genuine retirees of their due entitlements.

The exercise also revealed another important area of concern: the health of pensioners. It is reassuring to learn that the state government has reportedly promised to take over the medical treatment of some retirees who arrived for the biometrics in critical condition. This is a step in the right direction. Elderly citizens, after years of service, should have access to special health care facilities in the state. Setting aside hospitals or designated centres for the aged is not just desirable but necessary.

While pension payments in Rivers State have remained consistent, attention must now be directed towards gratuities. Senior citizens deserve to receive their retirement benefits without the bureaucratic hitches that have often marred the process. After years of loyal service, nothing is more demoralising than to see retirees languish for want of their gratuities. Every worker, as Scripture reminds us, is worthy of his wage.

Retirement, in any civilised society, should not be reduced to a sentence of suffering. In dealing with pensioners, government must consistently wear a human face. The humane manner displayed during this verification exercise should not be a one-off. It must become the norm in all dealings with retirees. Measures must continually be put in place to ensure that they do not feel abandoned by the state they served.

One welcome innovation has already been introduced. The Sole Administrator of Rivers State, Vice Admiral (Rtd) Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas, has altered the method of gratuity payment. Pensioners now receive their monies directly into their bank accounts, eliminating the cheque-based system that for years served as fertile ground for corruption. This reform is both pragmatic and forward-looking. Similarly, the implementation of the N32,000 pension harmonisation is also commendable.

Direct payments gratuities ensure transparency and drastically reduce the possibility of diversion of funds. More importantly, they restore confidence in the system and assure pensioners that their entitlements will reach them without interference. In this way, the government has not only safeguarded the process but also upheld the principle of accountability.

Seamless gratuity payment has a ripple effect on the workforce as a whole. When workers are confident that retirement will not plunge them into hardship, the temptation to falsify age in order to remain in service is eliminated. Such reforms, therefore, enhance efficiency, honesty, and productivity in the public service.

In sum, the Rivers State Government has struck a refreshing chord in its handling of pension verification. It has shown empathy, innovation, and accountability. However, the momentum must be sustained, and the focus must shift towards modernising verification methods and prioritising retirees’ welfare in health, gratuity, and dignity.

When retirees are treated with compassion and fairness, the message to those still in service is clear: faithful service to the state will not go unrewarded. The humane verification exercise, though a single event, offers a hopeful glimpse of what governance can look like when people, especially the elderly, are placed at the heart of policy.