Calls for Electoral Reform: Scrutiny on INEC Chairman's Appointment Intensifies
The method of selecting the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has long been a subject of critical discussion in Nigeria, and these discussions are intensifying as the nation looks towards future elections. The debate primarily revolves around ensuring the independence and impartiality of the electoral body's leadership, which is crucial for fostering credible elections and public trust.
Current Appointment Process:
Under the current constitutional framework, the Chairman of INEC is appointed by the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. This appointment is made after consultation with the Council of State, which comprises prominent former national figures, including former presidents and chief justices. The appointment then requires confirmation by the Senate. The INEC Chairman serves a five-year tenure and can be reappointed for a second term, as seen with the incumbent, Professor Mahmood Yakubu.
Furthermore, Section 157 of the 1999 Constitution specifies that the President can only remove the INEC Chairman based on an address supported by a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate, citing inability to discharge functions or misconduct. This provision is designed to provide some level of security of tenure and protect against arbitrary removal.
Why the Discussions for Change?
Despite these constitutional provisions, concerns about the process persist due to:
Perceived Executive Influence: Critics argue that the President's power to appoint the INEC Chairman, even with Senate confirmation and Council of State consultation, can still create a perception of executive influence or partisanship. This perception, whether accurate or not, can undermine public confidence in INEC's neutrality.
Need for Greater Independence: There have been consistent calls for reforms that would further insulate INEC from political interference. The argument is that for an electoral body to truly be independent, its leadership selection process should be beyond reproach and appear genuinely non-partisan.
Past Recommendations: Discussions about reforming the appointment method are not new. Previous recommendations have included proposals to shift the responsibility of appointing the INEC Chairman to a body like the National Judicial Council (NJC), aiming to ensure greater non-partisanship. However, such recommendations have historically been rejected by previous governments.
Public Trust and Credibility: The credibility of elections largely hinges on the perceived impartiality of the electoral umpire. Any process that raises questions about the INEC Chairman's independence can erode public trust, potentially leading to skepticism about election outcomes and reduced voter turnout.
Lessons from 2023 Elections: Following the 2023 general elections, which faced significant scrutiny and legal challenges, the importance of a transparent and unassailable process for appointing electoral officials has been further amplified. Stakeholders are pushing for comprehensive electoral reforms, and the selection of the INEC Chairman is a key component of these discussions.
While there are currently no immediate legislative changes to the appointment process, the ongoing discussions reflect a broad desire among civil society, legal experts, and some political figures for a more robust and truly independent method of selecting the head of Nigeria's electoral body. Future deliberations may indeed lead to constitutional amendments to address these persistent concerns, aiming to strengthen Nigeria's democratic institutions.
I'm Aisha shehu
Talksocialtalka News
