A post-mortem of the 2015 election

THE 2015 elections, more than any other before it, attracted the attention of the international community as well as Nigerians themselves with unequal passion.

The international community feared for its outcome, not the least, because of a history of post-election violence.

President Barrack Obama of the United States of America, among many world statesmen, pleaded for a peaceful election.

The prospect of a disorganised Nigerian estate, both to its immediate neighbours and the world community at large, could hardly be contemplated.

Nigerians themselves feared the worst – the fear of a possible disintegration of their nation not helped by threats of violence.    However, the outcome of the election defied widely held fears.

Both Professor Attahiru Jega, Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and President Goodluck Jonathan, were lavishly praised for different reasons.

The former and his team for conducting a relatively successful election, while Jonathan was praised for sportsmanship in conceding victory to his victorious challenger, retired General Muhammadu Buhari.

With the election concluded, attention must focus on what can be taken from it, as the reform of the processes of democracy must continue.

A “post-mortem” exercise, as a matter of fact, must follow every election, not the least in a nation, whose democracy is still at the rudimentary stage.

The first observation in the Nigerian 2015 election is the role money played in its politics.

We seem to be operating an electoral democracy meant for the rich, or those who can risk becoming debtors in pursuit of their ambitions.

The amounts of money stipulated for “tickets” into the various elective offices are outrageous. Many honest Nigerians can hardly partake in elections because of this.

Equally outrageous is the assumption that there is a monetary tag on every prospective Nigerian voter.

There is hardly any doubt that it could be expensive to get political messages across via the media in general, but the assumption that money or monetary gifts must be distributed to Nigerian voters is highly insulting and should be criminalized, both for the giver as well as for the taker.

The cheering news from the 2015 election may have been the disappointment by those who still failed to win their elections despite having spent so much, attempting to induce favourable outcomes.

There is also a sense in which many celebrated the defeat of President Goodluck Jonathan, candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party.

Even when they did not belong to any of the political parties, they nevertheless felt infuriated by the volume of naira that vested interests pumped into his campaign funds.

They wished for his defeat because of that, so the rich and their monumental obscenity could be shamed in a democracy that is about all of us.

There must be an enforceable cap on how much can be donated to individuals and political parties, as well as how much could be spent on electoral campaigns. .

Another observation from the election is that primordial sentiments still predominate.  There was ethnic, regional and religious voting in most of the geo-political zones.  The outcome of the presidential election hinged on who benefitted more from the balance of sentiments.

Of course, the election of General Muhammadu Buhari, candidate of the All Progressives Congress, was popular both at home and abroad; the fact of sentiments in our politics nevertheless remains intrinsic with the nature of society itself.

The South-South and South-East geo-political zones, for no considerations other than ethnic, voted overwhelmingly for Goodluck Jonathan, while it was unlikely the North could suddenly have turned the bastion of progressive ideology were the presidential candidate of the PDP to have come from that region and that of the rival APC from the South. The North voted overwhelmingly for Buhari, a revered member of the region.

Finally, there is hardly any doubt that Jega and his colleagues did a competent and patriotic job.

One quite admired the cultured and professorial manner Jega lectured Elder Peter Godsday Orubebe on the propriety of public conduct. Mr. Orubebe, a former Minister of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and an agent of the PDP in the presidential election, seemed determined to disrupt procedures at the election results collating centre, not least, because his party was on the losing end.

He alleged partiality on the part of Professor Jega, but should have since realised that his rather unruly conduct did not recommend him to the future.

However, issues of election malpractices and election-related violence and killings must not be ignored. A future campaign based on issues, rather than personal attacks and desperation, will go a long way in educating our people that democracy belongs in the pantheon of decent cultures.

•Akinola lives in Oxford, United Kingdom.