<h4>2023 Elections Lack Transparency</h4>
<p>OpenLife Nigeria reproduces a preliminary statement of the EU election observation mission (EU EOM) has been delivered before the completion of the entire electoral process. However, the EU EOM examines critical flaws in the election which have undermined a transparent process, promising to publish a final report, including full analysis and recommendations for electoral reform.</p>
<p><em><strong>On 25 February, Nigerians went to the polls in highly anticipated presidential and National Assembly </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>elections that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) kept on schedule despite a volatile</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>and challenging environment. Fundamental freedoms of assembly and movement were largely respected, </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>yet the full enjoyment of the latter was impeded by insufficient planning, insecurity and the prevailing </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>Naira and fuel shortages. Abuse of incumbency by various political office holders distorted the playing</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>field and there were widespread allegations of vote buying. Media provided an extensive coverage of the </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>three leading campaigns, while disinformation interfered with voters’ right to make an informed choice </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>on election day. The EU EOM is continuing its observation of the ongoing collation and tabulation of </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>results throughout the country.</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>INEC’s operational capacity was hampered by the ongoing fuel and Naira shortage. Insecurity prevented </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>it from accessing some Local Government Areas (LGAs), notably in the South. Attacks on INEC premises, </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>including just days before polling, hindered preparations in affected areas, while instilling fear in voters. </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>Overall, stakeholders had expressed confidence in INEC’s independence, professionalism, and voter </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>information efforts, but this decreased ahead of elections. INEC lacked efficient planning and transparency </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>during critical stages of the electoral process, while on election day trust in INEC was seen to further </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>reduce due to delayed polling processes and information gaps related to much anticipated access to results</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>on its Results Viewing Portal (IReV).</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>In the lead-up to elections, the widely welcomed Electoral Act 2022 introduced measures aimed at </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>building stakeholder trust, however leaving some important gaps in terms of accountability and INEC’s </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>power to enforce the law. Weak points include a lack of INEC empowerment to enforce sanctions for </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>electoral offences and breaches of campaign finance rules. Positively, INEC benefited from more timely </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>financing than for previous contests. Other new provisions also aimed to enhance transparency of results.</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>The introduction of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and the IReV for the 2023 elections </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>was perceived as an important step to ensure the integrity and credibility of elections. However, delayed </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>training of technical personnel, an inadequate mock testing exercise, and a lack of public information on </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>the election technologies diminished expectations and left room for speculation and uncertainty.</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>During the early stages of collation, presidential result forms from polling units were not displayed on the </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>IReV, while Senate and House of Representative results were slowly published. Presidential election result </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>forms started to be uploaded after 10 pm on election day, raising concerns and reaching only 20 per cent by noon on 26 February. Later the same evening, INEC explained the delay with “technical hitches.”</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>Among 93.4 million registered voters, 9.5 million additional voters were registered ahead of the 2023 </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>polls, of whom two-thirds were youth following mobilisation efforts during the registration period. Yet, </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>the collection of permanent voter cards (PVC), a requirement to vote, was negatively affected by poor </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>institutional planning. Two days before elections, INEC stated that 93.3 per cent of PVCs were collected. </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>Without an independent audit of the voter register, quality and inclusiveness could not be assured.</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>Following contentious candidate registration processes there were18 contestants for the presidential office </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>and over 4200 for 461 national assembly seats. They were selected in party primaries that reportedly </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>lacked transparency and inclusiveness, marked by very chronically low levels of participation of women </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>and youth. This compounded an overall stark lack of legal measures for inclusion and barriers to </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>participation which do not align with international standards.</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>The conduct of contesting parties and candidates, as well as some gaps in the law, led to a spate of pre￾election court cases, with some matters not finalised ahead of elections. During the pre-election period, </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>EU EOM interlocutors criticised various court rulings for being too technical, some leading to belated </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>primary re-runs, others to substitutions of perceived legitimate candidates, thereby eroding public trust, </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>exposing intra-party conflicts, and contributing to a volatile campaign environment.</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>The campaign was highly competitive, and contestants conducted rallies nationwide, but the Naira cash </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>and fuel scarcity reduced activities and attendance. Political parties denounced unequal campaign </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>conditions due to interference of opponent governors. Reports of vote and PVC buying were also frequent.</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>Internal party conflicts weakened the presidential campaigns of PDP and APC with personal accusation </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>obscuring issue-based messages shortly before the elections. There was a lack of prosecution of electoral </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>offences and a significant increase in violent incidents closer to elections, including attacks on candidates, </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>reportedly, aimed to disturb the elections and suppress voter participation, particularly in the South-East.</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>Media offered an extensive campaign coverage, despite economic hardships, institutional pressures, and </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>electoral violence. Prime-time newscasts focused on the Naira swap, and APC and PDP animosities, </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>granting both parties equitable exposure, although mostly negative in tone. Politicians used polarising </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>rhetoric on air and conspiracy theories, originating online, were frequently discussed in the most popular </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>talk shows. Analytical reporting on party policies was scant. Lead contestants could not be compared </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>directly, as APC and PDP rebuffed presidential debates, undermining voters’ right to an informed choice.</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>Social media was actively used by political actors as a campaign tool. However, the platforms were </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>misused to spread harmful content, including disinformation on key electoral processes; the measures the</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>platforms took to protect electoral integrity were insufficient. Misleading information also came from </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>political actors and contributed to a blurred information environment for voters.</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>Online and offline media joined forces with civil society and fact checkers to safeguard the integrity of </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>the pre-election information environment. Real-time fact checking of gubernatorial and other contestants’</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>debates strived to hold candidates accountable, while various formats of voter information, raised voter </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>awareness and helped to counter electoral insecurity, complementing INEC efforts.</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>Civil society organisations observed and scrutinised different aspects of the election, issued several pre￾election reports, at times probing INEC’s operational preparedness, offering voters a non-partisan </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>assessment of election preparations. Over 144,800 citizen observers monitored election day proceedings.</strong></em></p>
<p><em><strong>The European Union Election Observation Mission (EU EOM) has been present in Nigeria since 11 January 2023</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>following an invitation from the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). The Mission is led by Chief </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>Observer, Barry Andrews, Member of the European Parliament (MEP) (Ireland). In total, the EU EOM deployed </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>110 observers from 25 EU Member States, Canada, Norway and Switzerland across the country to assess the whole </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>electoral process against international obligations and commitments for democratic elections as well as the laws of</strong></em><br />
<em><strong>Nigeria. A delegation of the European Parliament, headed by Evin Incir, MEP (Sweden), also joined the mission </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>and fully endorses this Statement. On election day, observers visited over 240 polling units in 24 of the 36 states and </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) of Nigeria to observe voting and counting. This preliminary statement is </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>delivered prior to the completion of the election process. The final assessment of the elections will depend also on </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>the conduct of the remaining stages of the election process, in particular the tabulation of results, and the handling </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>of possible post-election day complaints and appeals. The EU EOM remains in country to observe post-election </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>developments and will publish a final report containing detailed recommendations within two months of the </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>conclusion of the electoral process. The EU EOM is independent in its findings and conclusions and adheres to the </strong></em><br />
<em><strong>Declaration of Principles for International Election Observation, endorsed at the United Nations in October 2005.</strong></em></p>

Serving God OpenLife Nigeria reports that the General Overseer of The Redeemed Christian Church of…
Universal Access To Clean Water And Sanitation OpenLife Nigeria reports that Governor of Lagos State,…
Detty December OpenLife Nigeria reports that Mr. Gbenga Onitilo, Managing Director of Travelden, a subsidiary…
What Nigerians Should Expect In 2027 OpenLife Nigeria reports that the Presiding Bishop of the…
What You Should Do To Revive PDP OpenLife Nigeria reports that former President…
Supreme Court Faults President Tinubu OpenLife Nigeria reports that the Supreme Court has faulted President…
This website uses cookies.