AUTHENTICITY CERTIFIED: Text version below transcribed directly from audio. 

Good Morning. Let me begin by thanking The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and Civil Advancement for Rural Empowerment Initiative (CARE) for their outstanding work in hosting this Town Hall Meeting. Katsina is beautiful. The hospitality of the Katsina people is legendary. [Thank you so much] 

In just about a week, most of the election noises would have quietened. And the country through INEC alone, would be about 150 billion Naira poorer. The noises would shift to the courts where another undisclosed amount would be expended.

Nigeria’s keenly anticipated national elections are scheduled to take place in February and March 2019. These elections will mark the sixth vote since the reintroduction of democracy in 1999—and will follow the country’s first peaceful transition of power to an opposition party in 2015, when Goodluck Jonathan of the PDP conceded to Muhammadu Buhari of the rival APC. Based on field research in eight states and Abuja, We identifies the emerging issues and shifting risks of election violence for Nigeria’s 2019 elections and provides recommendations for Nigerian authorities and international donors supporting the electoral process to help mitigate these risks. 

In 2019, Nigeria will hold national elections for the first time since a historic, peaceful, democratic transition of power to the opposition in 2015, when incumbent president Goodluck Jonathan of the People’s Democratic Party conceded defeat to Muhammudu Buhari of the All Progressives Congress (APC).

Buhari is standing for a second term, but nominations for other positions within the APC were highly contested and that lead to the fragmentation of the party, defections to other parties.

Social and economic inequalities, ethnic and religious divisions, and structural weaknesses, such as corruption and weak state capacity, remain prevalent across Nigeria and contribute to the risks of electoral violence.

Other important factors contributing to the risks of electoral violence have evolved since 2015, including changing forms of insecurity and the prominence of disputes within, rather than between, the political parties. Grievances or violence arising from recent local government elections may also have significant consequences for national elections.

Public confidence in Nigeria’s Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is mixed. Although INEC was applauded for organizing broadly credible elections in 2015, some respondents expressed concerns that the commission’s progress may not be sustained in 2019.

More assertive communications by INEC, transparent results management, staffing reforms, earlier and more consistent police preparations, improved internal democracy within political parties, and the creation of a specialized election offenses commission would likely alleviate some risks of violence in the 2019 election cycle.

Successful state-level initiatives—such as efforts in Plateau State to tamp down on religious intolerance and an initiative in Kano State to improve the quality of election coverage by the media—could be considered for adaptation in other states.

The United States and other international supporters of Nigeria’s electoral process should augment their diplomatic efforts to preempt electoral violence in the run-up to the 2019 elections.

During the campaign, voting, and results phases of the election, regional and continental leaders should be prepared to mediate disputes and to work toward peaceful acceptance of the election’s outcomes.

Nigeria is in an electoral season and once again the atmosphere is fired up with uncertainties. In contrast with what is obtainable in advanced democracies, the usual things prevalent in Nigeria during this period are the senseless jostling to recruit thugs that will intimidate voters and snatch ballot boxes. Mudslinging, character assassination, rumor peddling, inane propaganda, political grandstanding, trite rhetoric, empty promises, and more recently vote-buying which have taken an egregious dimension are commonplace during our electoral period. Campaigns are scarcely based on issues as politicians play the ethnic and religious trump cards. 

Recently, a serving minister in the present regime was quoted to have asked the people in his region to vote for the continuity of the present government so that by the year 2023 power will shift to their region. His appeal was not predicated on performance of the present regime, the party ideology or programmes but on primordial consideration. That is the nature of Nigeria politics—politics without principles.

Clearly, as the 2019 President election draw nigh, there are many questions nudging for answers and many issues requiring urgent consideration. The issues that should be on the front burner are voters’ apathy, the ailing Nigerian economy and how to revamp it, national security, fragile national unity, fight against corruption, survival of democracy, performance of the current regime, the capabilities of the candidates standing for elections, INEC neutrality and capacity to conduct free, fair and credible election among others.

Indeed, one glaring issue which should bother every genuine candidate but which has always been glossed over is that of voters’ apathy. This has been the case, more so, as the contestants are apparently more concerned with rigging than actual voting. Voters’ apathy can be reduced when thuggery and violence at the polling booths are reduced and voters feel that their votes can count. Again, it can be reduced when the electoral commission and the candidates standing for election engage the electorates closely and properly educate them on electioneering issues. But strangely, the Nigerian politicians seem to have accepted rigging as the norm as their main preoccupation during electioneering period is the strategy to outrig one another for rather than engage the electorates and sell their manifestoes, they prefer to hire thugs and arm them for violence and the electoral body is more interested in doing the biddings of the government rather playing the role of an unbiased umpire.

The neutrality and capacity of the current INEC to conduct a credible election are serious cause for concern this time round. It is the main cause of voters’ apathy as many people believed that their votes may not count. Moreover, all the elections conducted by the current regime are either flagrantly rigged or declared inconclusive where the ruling party could not rig overwhelmingly. It is clearly a dangerous signal. It is more worrisome to note that the insinuation that the current INEC chairman is a relation of the president has not been debunked by the presidency. It is believed rightly or wrongly that what happened in Ekiti and Osun states are a foretaste of what Nigerians should expect in 2019 President election. Another worrisome issue is the vote buying syndrome which has become dangerously entrenched in this era. Just three months to the election the government has suddenly come up with what they tagged, Social Intervention Funds which is interpreted by the opposition to be a ruse to buy vote from the unsuspecting and deliberately impoverished masses.

Another critical factor eligible voters are expected to consider in their voting decisions is the economy. The economy at present is in a comatose state as no visible investment on critical infrastructure that will stimulate the economy has been made in the past three years. Technically, it is said that the economy is out of recession but in reality, the country is neck deep in economic depression. In just 3 years the gains of the past years have been reversed; over 11 million jobs have been lost, thriving businesses have closed down; external debt profile is growing at an alarming rate. Nigeria has fallen from the height of the biggest economy in Africa and one of the fastest growing in the world to the poverty headquarters of the world where the citizens swoon in abject poverty. All the indicators are pointing in the negative direction and there is a warning that the economy may relapse into recession if precautionary measures are not taken. 

The critical questions now are: how did we get there? Does this regime have the programmes or policy framework to resuscitate the economy? Does the current regime have the capacity to initiate, formulate and implement workable policies to revamp the economy? And who among the candidates has the wherewithal to work for the growth of the economy? Nigeria should choose between economic progress and retrogression to the next level of poverty and hardship.

Without doubt, another issue that is expected to shape the voters’ decision in the forthcoming President election is that of national security. In the last three years, the level of insecurity in the land is unprecedented. The war against insurgency is far from being over as claimed, the menace of herdsmen is felt everywhere as over twenty thousand Nigerians have died within this period and people sleep with both eyes open and IDP camps are springing up everywhere. In the South the alarming spate of unemployment is fueling criminal activities. Gambling, cult activities, kidnapping and others social vices are rife and the current regime seems helpless about it all. It is disheartening that Nigeria is now ranked among the terrorist nations.

Furthermore, Nigerians are expected to put national unity into consideration in choosing who will pilot the affairs of the nation. Clearly, Nigeria has never been factionalized or divided as it is now. Separatist agitations have been fueled by the divisive tendencies of the current regime. So, the people should make a choice between national unity or continue with government of exclusion. The background of the election candidates is also expected to influence the decision of the electorates. The identity as well as the health status of the incumbent president is an issue. I do not believe in the cynical claim in some quarters that all the candidates are the same. It is a careless Presidentization and a mischievous attempt to discredit genuine candidates—one that may lead to voters’ apathy. I must state unequivocally that the candidates are not the same and can never be. Nigerians should make a choice between mediocrity and merit, nepotism and fairness, competence and incompetence…

War against corruption is another factor that may affect voters’ decision. Despite the din about fighting corruption by the present government, Nigerians position on the corruption index has not improved because of the oddity and lopsidedness in the so-called battle to end corruption. Nigeria should choose between arrest and harassment of political opponents in the name of corruption and building institutions and developing systems and procedures that will curb corruption. Other issues that are expected to shape voters’ decision are the performance of the current government and the need to save democracy in Nigeria. The performances of the current regime have been everything but palatable. In particular, its tendencies are antithetical to the ideals of democracy. Its antagonism to the National Assembly, flagrant disobedience to court orders and its poor human rights record are things that electorates are supposed to consider when casting their votes.

Obviously, it is a very dangerous thing to have an incompetent person in a position of authority. More dangerous also is having a parochial and a depraved mind in power. Nigerians should open their eyes and disregard the footless claim to integrity and unsubstantiated performance claims.

In the presidential contest, we now know it will likely be a straight contest between incumbent Muhammadu Buhari of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and challenger Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP).

Dozens of other candidates will be competing. These include: Oby Ezekwesili, the former minister and founder of the Bring Back Our Girls movement; Professor Kingsley Moghalu, the former deputy governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria; and Omoyele Sowore, the owner of the media outlet Sahara Reporters. But when it comes down to it, it will be a two-horse race.

This will not be the first time Buhari, 76, and Atiku, 72, have faced one another. Both men contested the 2007 presidential elections, coming a distant second and third behind the PDP’s Umaru Yar’Adua. In 2014, the two met again in the APC primaries, with Buhari emerging victorious.

These past races offer little guidance, however, for how the 2019 presidential election between these two gladiators of Nigerian politics might play out.

There are two ways of assessing their chances of electoral success: by looking at the main issues and where they stand on them; and by looking at the electoral maths required to win and seeing how they are each faring.

The issues

First, the issues. Nigerian voters have many concerns, but for many, the key concerns are the same three that dominated the 2015 elections.

Corruption

In 2015, Buhari drew heavily on his reputation as incorruptible as he vowed to root out corruption. In 2019, he will undoubtedly reiterate this promise and has some things to boast about. His government claims to have recovered N1 trillion ($2.75 billion) in stolen assets. It has made giant strides in implementing the Treasury Single Account (TSA) to reduce leakages. And it has overseen the convictionof two former governors.

Many, however, see President Buhari’s war on corruption as disappointing. In particular, critics accuse the government of only targeting political opponents, while allowing its cronies to go scot-free.

In this campaign, though, the ruling APC has a clear advantage on this issue. The PDP is remembered for plundering the state during its previous sixteen years in power. Meanwhile, its flag-bearer, the former vice-president from 1999 to 2007, is one of the country’s richest politicians and has faced several allegations of fraud. In some circles, Atiku’s very name is synonymous with high-level graft.

Many of the fiercest accusations against the PDP candidate have come from former president Olusegun Obasanjo. After the two fell out dramatically in 2006, Obasanjo repeatedly insisted that his former deputy was corrupt and unfit for office. That was at least until a few weeks ago, when Obasanjo changed tack. It remains to be seen if this reconciliation will alleviate the heavy cloud of corruption hanging over Atiku’s head.

Buhari’s main challenge in office has been the struggling economy, which plunged into recession in 2016. It has since recovered, but growth remains slow. Before Buhari took office in 2015, one US dollar bought between N199 and N220. It recently stabilised at around N360, having soared to an all-time high of N450.

Given this context, Atiku is promising to revitalise the economy and emphasising his experience. Atiku has business interests across Nigeria and claims to have provided 50,000 direct jobs and 250,000indirect jobs. He will likely talk up the fact that he oversaw the privatisation efforts under Obasanjo, though the APC may respond by claiming Atiku fraudulently enriched himself through this same process.

His selection of Peter Obi, former Anambra state governor and an astute business man, as his running mate further boosts his economic credentials. Meanwhile, his related promises to restructure the federal system and devote a minimum of 21% of the budget to education may also win him some supporters.

For Buhari, the economy may be a weakness. But he will also have the advantage of incumbency. His administration is currently implementing social intervention programmes said to be touching the lives of thousands. In recent months, it has also launched a collateral-free loan schemefor micro-businesses, which could win sympathies among many nationwide.

In office, President Buhari has made significant progress combating Boko Haram. The insurgents previously controlled a sizeable portion of the North East, but are now a weakened force. Buhari is lauded for his actions in this area, but Atiku may also seek credit for mobilising hunters to wade off the militants in his native Adamawa.

While the threat from Boko Haram may have diminished to an extent, however, insecurity pervades much of the rest of the country. Nigeria faces the escalating herders-farmers conflict, Biafra separationist agitations, armed banditryand kidnappingto name a few. Buhari has been seen to be slow to respond to many of these threats and has been accused of only caring about issues that affect his own ethnic group.

Electoral maths

Atiku can mount a serious challenge in the 2019 elections. He is up against a candidate who spent seven months in treating an undisclosed ailment and whose national approval rating is at just 40% according to Buharimeter. The PDP challenger can also rely on the full party machinery now he has won the primaries and draw on the influence of party stalwarts. Meanwhile, the formation of the opposition Coalition of United Political Parties(CUPP) means there will be fewer candidates to split the anti-APC vote.

That being said, the incumbent has the advantage. In 2015, Buhari won by a significant margin of 2.5 million votes. Although his record in office has been mixed, 2019 looks like his election to lose.

Below is a breakdown of the race in Nigeria’s six geopolitical zones. For context:

• There are currently 84,271,832 registered votersnationwide.
• In 2011, Buhari got 12.2 million votes (32%) to Goodluck Jonathan’s 22.5 million (59%).
• In 2015, Buhari got 15.4 million votes (54%) to Jonathan’s 12.9 million (45%).

North West

• 2011 results: Buhari, 6,453,437 (60.43%); Jonathan, 3,466,924 (32.46%).
• 2015 results: Buhari, 7,115,199 (81.34%); Jonathan, 1,352,071 (15.46%).
• 2019 registered voters: 20,122,934 (as at August 2018).

President Buhari is adored by peasants in northern Nigeria. He is popularly referred to by them as Mai Gaskiya, which translates roughly to “trustworthy” in Hausa. According to a source, the more Buhari is criticised, the more people in the north love him.

The North West, by far Nigeria’s most populous zone, is particularly strong Buhari territory. In both 2011 and 2015, he won all seven states. His approval rating here is 58%.

Kano state alone has 5,462,898 registered voters (as at August 2018), making it the country’s second biggest voting bloc after Lagos. Governor Abdullahi Umar Ganduje wields extensive influence in this state and has promised Buhari a gargantuan 5 millionvotes in the presidential poll. The governor already delivered 2.9 millionvotes for Buhari in the APC’s questionable primaries.

There are a couple of factors going against the APC, however. Firstly, the conduct of the APC primaries has created some discontent within the party. And secondly, former Kano Governor Rabiu Kwankwaso, who helped Buhari win big in 2015, has defected to the PDP and declared his full support for Atiku.

North East

• 2011 results: Buhari, 3,660,919 (63.42%); Jonathan, 1,832,651 (31.75%).
• 2015 results: Buhari, 2,848,678 (75.28%); Jonathan, 796,588 (21.05%).
• 2019 registered voters: 11,170,847 (as at August 2018).

Buhari is similarly well-liked in the North East, where he is credited with suppressing Boko Haram and bringing normalcy to Adamawa, Borno and Yobe states. This zone has also benefited significantly from patronage politics under Buhari, who has recruited many of his top lieutenants from the North East. His approval rating here is 57%.

Atiku is from the North East, specifically Adamawa state. He also has some important allies in the zone. In Gombe, Governor Ibrahim Hassan Dankwambo will help him win votes. And in Taraba, former minister Aisha Alhassan will also exert her influence in Atiku’s favour having recently walked out of the APC.

Helped by popular frustrations at Taraba’s ongoing insecurity, Alhassan’s extensive influence means she is likely to help maintain the PDP’s record of winning this state. However, Atiku faces an uphill battle everywhere else in a zone that voted overwhelming for Buhari in 2015.

North Central

• 2011 results: Buhari, 1,744,575 (31.87%); Jonathan, 3,376,570 (61.69%).
• 2015 results: Buhari, 2,411,013 (56.24%); Jonathan, 1,715,818 (40.03%).
• 2019 registered voters: 13,333,435 (as at August 2018).

The North Central zone is traditionally Nigeria’s swing region. In 2011, Buhari only won in Niger state. In 2015, he won four states – Kwara, Kogi, Benue and Niger – and lost in relatively close races in Plateau, Nasarawa and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Abuja.

In 2019, Buhari may find it harder going than the last time. Many people are unhappy with the government’s response to herder-farmer clashes, which have ravaged Plateau and Benue states in particular.

Meanwhile, political realignments in several states could make things tough for Buhari. Two defections to the PDP stand out in particular: Bukola Saraki, the Senate President and former Kwara governor; and Samuel Ortom, governor of Benue. Their switches of allegiance could make this zone more competitive.

South West

• 2011 results: Buhari, 321,609 (7.05%); Jonathan, 2,836,417 (62.22%).
• 2015 results: Buhari, 2,433,122 (53.6%); Jonathan, 1,821,416 (40.12%).
• 2019 registered voters: 16,341,312 (as at August 2018).

The South West will be closely fought. In 2015, the PDP only won one of the six states here, but still managed to get 40.12% of the vote.

Some believe the APC will do better in 2019 than in the last elections. This is in part thanks to Buhari’s decision to posthumously honour MKO Abiola, the winner of the annulled 1993 presidential elections, and move Democracy Day to the 12 June, the date of that vote. Abiola, who grew up in Ogun state, is still celebrated in the South West and around Nigeria. Buhari is also aided by the fact the APC can draw on the influence of all six governors in the South West, the prominent former Lagos governor Bola Tinubu, and his Ogun-born vice-president Yemi Osinbajo.

Some factors could undermine the party’s fortunes, however. The APC primaries have created some disgruntled figures. Many voters see the administration’s performance in the past few years as lacklustre. And the powerful church could yet play a significant and thus far unclear role.

The huge Redeemed Christian Church of God in Lagos may back Osinbajo, which would consolidate support for Buhari. But others like televangelist Tunde Bakare, who first publicly announced the candidature of Oby Ezekwisili, could encourage voters to support her, potentially drawing votes away from the leading candidates.

South East

• 2011 results: Buhari, 20,335 (0.40%); Jonathan, 4,985,246 (98.69%).
• 2015 results: Buhari, 198,248 (7.04%); Jonathan, 2,464,906 (87.55%).
• 2019 registered voters: 10,154,748 (as at August 2018).

The APC and Buhari brands play poorly in the South East and they are even less popular following their handling of the Biafra secessionist movement. Many in the South East believe the region is marginalised, and the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has been agitating for independence in the past few years. The government has responded heavy-handedly with clampdowns and arrests.

All this means that the PDP is likely to do very well here once again. The fact that Atiku picked Peter Obi, a former Anambra governor, as his running mate will further attract support.

The downside for the PDP is that the South East is the zone with the fewest registered voters, accounting for just 12.04% of the nationwide total. Turnout also tends be low. In 2015, it was just 39% in this region, and it could remain low especially with IPOB calling on supporters to boycott all elections until the government agrees to hold a referendum on independence.

South South

• 2011 results: Buhari, 49,978 (0.79%); Jonathan, 6,128,963 (96.92%).
• 2015 results: Buhari, 418,890 (7.96%); Jonathan, 4,714,725 (89.66%).
• 2019 registered voters: 13,148,556 (as at August 2018).

The South South will also largely back the PDP as it did overwhelmingly in 2011 and 2015. The region – and in particular the populous Rivers state – will likely be a vote bank for Atiku. In these efforts, the party will be aided by Nyesom Wike, the Rivers state governor, a powerful PDP mobiliser.

Buhari will not mount a serious challenge to Atiku in the South South. But he might expect his meagre 7.96% vote share from 2015 to increase following the defections of two former governors – Akwa Ibom’s Godswill Akpabio and Delta’s Emmanuel Uduaghan – to the APC.

Senior lawyers and many of the Tribunal Judges are expected to smile all the way to the bank. So would some retired judges and all those who serve as brokers to our skewed justice system. In all, not less than about 250 Billion Naira of Nigeria’s resources—hard earned or not—would have gone for this election. I am including of course, cash for votes and other ‘financial logistics.’ In the end, nothing fundamental would have changed because nothing fundamental has been rigorously addressed. Barring an upset, President Muhammadu Buhari would be returned. So would over 70% of the incumbents. Very few of them have earned a return because very few of them have positively affected the lives of those under their charge. But then, what are the criteria for a return? There is no standard, no red line, no irreducible minimum below which, an incumbent should be denied.

The only standard seems to be the availability of money, however acquired. And the ability to speak with both sides of the mouth. At the end of the exercise, the rich political class—and its fat-cat lawyers— would have become richer while the rest of us would have become poorer. The infrastructures would remain weak and critical sectors would remain underfunded. We would be overly optimistic if not stupid to expect things to change for the better going forward just because we have gone through another electoral cycle while the system remains as it is. Or to think there is no tipping point to this thoughtless way of running a country. I had hoped—it seems such a waste of emotions now—that a third force would emerge that would throw up some uncomfortable questions about governance in the country. A force that would challenge the status quo not seek to accommodate it. Yes, a third force did come up and some of the names appeared credible. But it compromised itself by aligning with tainted politicians. It wanted power on existing terms, with the existing system. Alas, the third force has not proved to be a force for any fundamental change. It is just, for the members, another route to political power. The ‘Not too young to run’ group is another sad tale. Having secured the passage of a bill that lowered eligible ages for those aspiring to political positions, it now wanted some tokenism from existing political parties.

The problem, dear ‘Not too young to run’ is in the parties themselves and the systems they operate. And asking for guarantied slots is already a compromise against merit and competence. Macron, Kurz and Trudeau or even Obama and Clinton didn’t just happen. These guys prepared themselves for political leadership over a considerable length of time. And they worked within a system that gave opportunities to ideas, to merit. They were/are at the helm of affairs in their respective countries not because but in spite of age. It is also disconcerting to see how many political neophytes think it is easier to vie for the presidency than to vie for the Senate or House of Rep. It is like hoping to be the CEO of a multinational company without serving some apprenticeship. It is bewildering to see them talk of a preferred destination without considering the vehicle that will take them here.

I think the whole attitude belittles the seriousness of the occasion if not the institution of the presidency itself. The issue as I see it is that we are a poor country, our oil resources notwithstanding. It is an issue both the leaders and the led are in denial about but the earlier we faced that fact, the better for us. We are also a nation that has badly managed its resources. I expect new parties or new thinking to address the issue of the economy and how it can work better for all of us. This new thinking should query why we spend colossal sums every four years on election materials. Is it not possible to leverage on available new technology to effect a cheaper and yet more reliable polling system? The present system is archaic and wasteful. It only serves the interest of the current rigging class. I also believe it will be cheaper and less acrimonious to have a fixed term of six years because we will then be having two elections in 12 years instead of three. The reality of our economic situation where we barely have money for capital projects dictates that we cannot afford a bicameral National Assembly.

We should choose one. We also cannot afford full time Assembly members at the rate it is causing the nation to sustain them. The amount that goes to the Executive especially Aso Rock is atrocious in the circumstances. The place is unwieldly and unproductive. It is a drain on our purse. The buzz word in town is restructuring. Yet very few of its proponents have come up with specifics so we are left to individual interpretations of the word. It is however clear that a country that spends 90% of its resources to feed 1% of its populace needs to be restructured. A budget where over 70% goes to recurrent expenditure needs to be restructured. A country where the states rely on the centre for sustenance needs to be restructured. A country where state governors have to look to the centre to combat crimes has to be restructured. An economy that does not reward productivity, where consumption tax is distributed from the centre, where those who spend are not those who earn, needs to be restructured. To me, the issue with our country is the economy and our management of it. It is why Nigerians are falling into poverty every day. It is why we have one of the highest infant mortality rates in the world. It is why we have one of the highest out of school children in the world. It is why we have instability in the north-eastern part of the country. It is why youth unemployment rate is this high. The devil is in the system we operate. It is why the political class is the richest class.

Anybody aspiring for public office must first acknowledge that we are poor. He must then tell us in graphic details how the economy should be restructured and revamped starting with the political ruling class—after all, charity should start from home. No leader has done that in the 20 years of our most recent democracy. And none during this campaign has promised that. Yet, the real issue is how to free our economy from rampaging vultures. Some of them are on the soap box as we speak.

Thank you very much, everybody.