The recent local government elections in Lagos State have sparked controversy and renewed calls for electoral reform, particularly regarding the role of State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIECs). The Accord Party in Lagos has strongly advocated for the dissolution of SIECs, arguing that their inherent lack of independence undermines the integrity of grassroots elections. Mr. Dele Oladeji, the State Chairman of the Accord Party, voiced these concerns in an interview with the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), criticizing the conduct of the Saturday local government elections and highlighting the need for a more credible electoral process. He posited that transferring the responsibilities of SIECs to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) would significantly enhance democracy and foster greater political participation at the grassroots level.
Oladeji’s argument centers on the perceived bias of SIECs, exemplified by the Lagos State Independent Electoral Commission (LASIEC). He asserted that the recent local government elections were marred by haphazard preparations and the disenfranchisement of numerous opposition candidates. This, he argued, contributes to voter apathy stemming from a lack of confidence in the electoral process. Oladeji contended that true democracy at the grassroots can only be achieved through an independent and impartial electoral umpire, a role he believes INEC is better equipped to fulfill. He dismissed the notion that INEC would be overburdened by the additional responsibility of conducting local government elections, emphasizing INEC’s established experience and capacity to manage elections at various levels.
The crux of the debate revolves around the independence and impartiality of electoral bodies. While SIECs are constitutionally mandated to conduct local government elections, their perceived susceptibility to manipulation by state governments has raised concerns about their ability to deliver credible elections. Critics argue that SIECs often lack the necessary resources, expertise, and independence to resist political interference, leading to compromised electoral outcomes that undermine democratic principles. The Accord Party’s call for the scrapping of SIECs reflects a growing sentiment among some stakeholders that a centralized electoral body, like INEC, offers a more viable path towards ensuring free and fair elections at all levels of government.
Proponents of transferring electoral responsibilities to INEC highlight the commission’s relative independence from state governments and its established infrastructure for conducting elections. They argue that INEC possesses the technical expertise, logistical capacity, and experience to effectively manage elections across the country, including local government polls. Moreover, a centralized electoral body could promote uniformity in electoral procedures and standards, reducing inconsistencies and potential for manipulation. This, in turn, could enhance public trust in the electoral process and encourage greater participation at the grassroots level.
However, arguments against transferring electoral responsibilities to INEC also exist. Some argue that INEC is already burdened with conducting national and state elections and that adding local government elections to its mandate would overstretch its resources and capacity. Others raise concerns about the potential for centralization to marginalize local communities and reduce their control over local governance. They argue that SIECs, despite their flaws, provide a platform for local participation and representation in the electoral process. The debate, therefore, involves a complex interplay of factors, including the need for electoral integrity, the capacity of electoral bodies, and the importance of local autonomy.
The controversy surrounding the recent local government elections in Lagos State underscores the ongoing debate about the structure and function of electoral bodies in Nigeria. The Accord Party’s call for the abolition of SIECs and the transfer of their responsibilities to INEC represents a significant challenge to the existing electoral framework. While proponents of this change argue it would strengthen electoral integrity and promote grassroots democracy, opponents raise concerns about the feasibility and potential consequences of such a move. The debate ultimately revolves around finding the optimal balance between ensuring credible elections, managing electoral resources effectively, and preserving local autonomy in the electoral process. The future of SIECs and the role of INEC in local government elections remain crucial issues that will continue to shape the landscape of Nigerian democracy.
