It was three days well spent from December 12 to 15, 2016. Members of the Presidential Committee on Constitutional and Electoral Reforms were locked up in the reclusive and intellectually stimulating ambience of Le Meridien Hotel in Uyo, Akwa Ibom State for their second retreat.
They were supported by consultants, resource persons and secretariat staff. And after three days of intense brainstorming, they came out reassured that they are on the right course to sanitise the much abused electoral process in Nigeria.
The Uyo retreat was the second of its kind since the Committee was appointed by President Muhammadu Buhari in October 2016. The first was a one day event held on November 1, 2016 at the Transcorp Hilton Hotel in Abuja.
At the first retreat and with representatives of the DFID and NDI in attendance, some crucial presentations were made. One was a discussion of judicial issues in pre-election matters between 2007 and 2015. It was established that Section 31 (6) as provided for in the Electoral Act of 2010 is very deficient.
There was an exploration of how alternative dispute resolution mechanisms could be used to settle election matters. There were also discussions on the procedure to be adopted by the committee in producing the report; technology and elections; certain lapses in the legal framework, particularly the Constitution and the Electoral Act, as observed by the INEC representative, hence the need to incorporate new areas of development in the legal framework and other related issues. The second retreat held at Uyo with the support of NDI and USAID was something else.
By this time, the Committee had split into four clusters – A, B, C and D with each cluster assigned an aspect of election to study and report back on.
Additionally, the Judiciary, which plays a critical role in election disputes, was represented by Justice Mohammed Lawal Shuaibu, who presented a paper on judicial issues in the election process. From the legislature came the Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu, who presented a paper on the challenges of electoral reform in the National Assembly.
The Nnamani committee even went far out of the shores of Nigeria to gain from the knowledge of other African countries at this retreat. From South Africa came the Vice Chairman of South Africa Elections Commission, Mr Terry Tselane with a well-researched presentation of the South African experience in alternative resolution to election disputes.
As the discussions got heated up, it became clear to all that the initial skepticism which had greeted the setting up of the Nnamani panel were premature and misplaced. The criticisms were based on the premise that the committee was one too many since the government had not gathered the nerve to implement the reports of the Justice Muhammad Uwais Committee, which submitted its report in 2008.
To be sure, all participants agreed that the Uwais committee was composed of members with impeccable character and that they did a good job. But as the discussions went on, it was clear that fixing election problems in Nigeria is a task that requires not only clean men and women but men with field experience.
This last requirement was just not there in the Uwais committee. Secondly, since Uwais committee submitted its report, no concerted effort has been made to codify the recommendations through legislative action.
Professor Attahiru Jega a member of the Uwais panel later became the National Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.
As a member of the august committee, he was thoroughly grounded in the motivations for most of the recommendations – like the biometric registration of voters. He made sure some of these amendments and recommendations were captured in the 2010 constitution amendments and the Electoral Act used for the 2011 general elections that were considered an improvement on the 2007 ‘election-like event.’ But Justice Uwais himself is not happy with this piecemeal implementation of his report.
Speaking at an electoral reform review session organised by the Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre, he noted that the crisis of the electoral system in Nigeria is traceable to the failure of the government to implement the report of his committee in a holistic manner.
The “pick and choose” style of the government was negatively affecting elections in the country. In his words, “As we know, the bill that was produced by the National Assembly though reflected some recommendations of the Electoral Reform Committee, but not all of these recommendations were adopted.
As far as the Electoral Reform Committee was concerned, the recommendations were intended to be in tandem with one another.”
At the inauguration of the Nnamani committee on October 5, 2016, the Minister for Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN, urged it to review the extent of the implementation of the recommendations of the 2008 Justice Muhammed Uwais Election Reform Commission and advice on outstanding issues for implementation. But even if the Uwais report were implemented holistically as he advocated, it would leave a lot of problems unsolved.
A lot has happened between 2008 and today that needs attention. Suddenly because the fight for elective offices has become very competitive, there is hardly an election won with landslide victory.
Consequently, “inconclusive elections” have entered the political lexicon of Nigeria. Again, the Uwais report never quite produced an answer to the problem posed in Kogi when a gubernatorial candidate who was on a clear road to victory suddenly dropped dead.
One of the cluster groups of the Nnamani Committee presented a thorough xray of the Uwais report – chapter by chapter and made a presentation at the Uyo retreat. An added advantage of the Nnamani committee is that a significant number of key stakeholders in this committee were active players in politics, having contested several elections and won, with experience and knowledge of the issues requiring reform.
Even then, Mr. Malami at his inaugural meeting advised the committee to consult far and wide and in particular with National Assembly and Judiciary in order to make recommendations that would stand the test of time.
This process has already started with the participation of Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu, who chairs the Senate Committee on Constitutional Review and Justice Mohammed Lawal Shuaibu from the Judiciary at the Uyo retreat.
Chairman Nnamani revealed at the event that contacts with the two important arms of the government will be deepened preparatory to the submission of its final report. With the highly successful Uyo retreat behind us, the question for the Nnamani Panel is: What Next?
The panel will now hold public hearings in the geopolitical zones of the country in conformity with the Malami mandate to consult widely. After that, a report of its findings will be compiled and handed over to the President.
