Since Nigeria returned to democratic rule in 1999, nine presidential elections have been held. Before 1999, three presidential elections took place (in 1979, 1983, and 1993). None of these except the 1993 election can be said to have been free and fair. Yes, they were competitive, but often in a deadly manner and because of politicians’ selfish interest.
Even local government elections in Nigeria are frequently rigged. Opposition candidates are often intimidated or physically brutalised, and there have been cases of people being killed because of their political choices and views.
The only election widely considered free and fair—the 1993 election—was annulled by the military regime of Gen. Ibrahim Badamosi Babangida, plunging the country into a political crisis.
So, what are the incentives that lead to substandard elections in Nigeria, where free and fair elections seem elusive? These incentives also explain why elections are dangerously competitive.
Factors Influencing Nigeria’s Electoral Process
Greed
No matter how wealthy someone is, greed can drive them to fight over even the smallest things. It’s baffling why someone who has served as a state governor for eight years would want to use the National Assembly as their retirement home.
Worse still, many of them win reelection not through impressive accomplishments but by forcefully imposing themselves on the electorate through rigging. Greed is undeniably one of the reasons Nigeria’s elections are not free and fair.
Jumbo Pay
The monthly salaries of political officeholders in Nigeria remain controversial, as they often collect amounts beyond what the law stipulates. They achieve this by hiding these payments under maintenance and running costs.
For example, according to the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC), the government agency responsible for determining the remuneration of political officeholders, a senator’s official monthly take-home pay, including salary and allowances, is N1.06 million.
However, the political atmosphere during election campaigns and on election days shows that the desperation of senatorial aspirants goes far beyond a N1.06 million salary.
Some politicians spend several millions of naira to win elections. There are instances where a governorship candidate spent over N500 million and still failed to secure his party’s ticket.
Some years ago, former Kaduna Senator Shehu Sani revealed that each senator took home more than N13 million per month as salary. His colleagues in the chamber disowned him, and RMAFC dismissed his claim as a figment of his imagination.
Recently, a senior lawmaker from Kano, Sumaila Kawu, revealed that his total monthly monetary package was N21 million. Like Sani, he was disowned and chastised by the agency responsible for paying political officeholders.
The excessive salaries and allowances of political officeholders are among the many reasons elections in Nigeria are not free and fair. The competitiveness we witness during elections is not driven by a love for public service but by a love for the financial rewards and emoluments attached to these offices.
Juicy Allowances
When elections are conducted, and winners are sworn in, they receive several allowances such as wardrobe, travel, sitting, hazard, entertainment, domestic, and car allowances, among others.
These emoluments, when summed up, amount to millions of naira. These allowances make political positions in Nigeria highly attractive, even to those who have little to offer.
Politicians become desperate, willing to do anything to satisfy their ambitions. They may induce electoral umpires with money or hire political thugs to intimidate opponents and compromise the process, all because of the lucrative allowances they receive monthly or annually—amounts that far exceed what a university Vice-Chancellor earns.
Rosy Estacode
Estacode is a monetary allowance paid to political officeholders and civil servants to cover travel expenses. In Nigeria’s political landscape, it has become another avenue for inflating travel costs.
Politicians often organise unnecessary workshops, training, and seminars, choosing locations that allow them to inflate travel allowances, which are usually paid in foreign currencies like the US Dollar, Pound Sterling, and Euro. It is sickening to see some governors from the Northeast geopolitical zone organise workshops on the solution to insecurity in their geopolitical situation in a foreign country.
The generous estacode allowances contribute to why elections are fiercely competitive and not free and fair, as many politicians are driven by the financial rewards of holding office.
Ethnicity
In Nigeria, ethnic-based voting is a common practice, and some regions not only vote along ethnic lines but also rig elections to favour their kin. This pattern was evident during the 2023 presidential election involving major contenders Bola Tinubu, Peter Obi, Atiku Abubakar, and Rabiu Kwankwaso.
In Kano State, Kwankwaso secured 58.59% of the votes in the most populous northern state because he is their son.
In the Southwest, where Bola Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC) came from, he won in Ekiti, Ogun, Ondo, and Oyo, ethnic sentiment was apparent.
In Lagos, which is considered Tinubu’s political base, Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP) won due to the significant population of Southeast origin, though APC-hired thugs attempted to intimidate voters.
Obi won in all five southeastern states with 87.78% of the total valid votes, not only because of his inspiring manifesto but also due to his Igbo heritage.
Electorate Attitude
The attitude of the electorate is disheartening. They rarely hold their representatives accountable, especially after receiving N5,000 or less to cast their votes. This voter inducement is another critical factor.
Consequently, those in power often fail to implement policies that could improve the quality of life for everyone. Instead, they offer palliatives like bags of rice or packs of noodles when the populace begins to ask questions.
Corruption
The root of all these issues is corruption within the electoral system. There is often collusion between electoral officials and politicians, with the highest bidder winning the election.
Conclusion
No country can progress in a democratic environment where elections are not free and fair, and where the electorate cannot freely choose their leaders. The presidential elections of 1979, 1983, 1999, 2003, 2007, 2011, 2015, 2019, and 2023 cannot be considered free and fair.
The past elections were highly competitive, driven by the selfish interests of political office holders, the desire for power, and a lack of people-oriented policies that could liberate the electorate from economic bondage. Politicians have weaponized poverty, making it easier for them to sway the decisions of the impoverished electorate during elections.
Join EdubaseNG WhatsApp Channel to get the latest education & student loan tips
Join our Telegram Channel to get the latest news about Student Loans & Education News.
Are you a stakeholder in education? You can become our guest writer. Write to us using our our email address here
