A report had asserted that the Commission was contemplating a policy to withdraw and destroy PVCs that remain uncollected for a decade. This recommendation was allegedly among 208 proposals arising from the Commission’s review of the 2023 general elections.
The report further claimed that “the low rate of PVC collection and other related challenges are illustrative of the problem of processing and managing voters in Nigeria.” However, INEC has described the report as “incorrect” and advised members of the public to ignore it. The Commission maintained that at no time did it contemplate destroying uncollected PVCs.
It is noteworthy that the claim of a low rate of PVC collection conflicts with INEC’s data. Before the preceding presidential election, INEC announced that 87,209,007 PVCs were collected nationwide, while the uncollected PVCs stood at 6,259,229 (representing 6.7 per cent of the total PVCs). This means that 93.3 per cent of 93,469,008 registered voters collected their voter cards.
Although INEC has debunked the veracity of the subject report, the issues presented are weighty; hence deserving of critical interrogation. For instance, how long can INEC keep election materials, including unclaimed voters’ cards before disposing of them? Why are Nigerians processing voters’ cards only to lose interest in them just when they are ready for collection? Has this anything to do with their confidence or lack of it in the electoral process? What can be done about voters’ apathy if this is the case? More importantly, should PVC remain the only voting instrument?
Some experts have argued that INEC should not be saddled with the responsibility of preserving and retaining uncollected PVCs in perpetuity. As an example, the Companies and Allied Matters Act 2020 (CAMA), mandates corporate bodies to retain records stored in pursuance of the provisions of CAMA in soft copies for six years. Consequently, the proponents submit that the extant Electoral Act should be amended to specify definite timelines for the retention and destruction of unclaimed PVCs.
On the other hand, it is opined that destroying unclaimed PVCs defeats the objective of voter registration. Under the current legal framework, PVC is the singular legitimate tool for voting in Nigeria. Consequently, the destruction of uncollected PCVs would translate to the disenfranchisement of a significant number of the electorate. While the statistical percentage of uncollected PVCs vis-à-vis collected PVCs may appear negligible considering the usual poor voter turnout (only 26.72 per cent reportedly voted in the 2023 presidential and National Assembly elections) the number of unclaimed PVCs (over 6 million) is substantial.
Further, PVC contains sensitive information, hence disposing of it without first giving the affected voter adequate, even extra opportunity to collect his card could amount to a breach of the data protection laws. In addition, enormous (taxpayers’) resources and time were invested in producing the cards, so it would be economically imprudent to discard unclaimed PVCs. It is recommended that the window for PVC collection should be open, and may only be closed a few weeks to an election cycle. Registrants should be able to pick up their cards anytime and unclaimed cards should be archived. Simply put, INEC must devise a convenient-card-collection procedure to inspire registrants.
On the issue of voters’ apathy, INEC should demonstrate credibility and transparency in the conduct of its business. It should walk its talk – if it promises electronic transmission of votes in real-time, then it should do so. INEC must sanitise the electoral process to stimulate public trust. No person of good character desires to participate in a fraudulent electoral process. Only credible elections will attract considerable participation.
Fundamentally, is the continuous use of PVC necessary? Is PVC dispensable? Better still, should PVCs be the only means of voting? It is common knowledge that the biometrics data of most Nigerians are already domiciled with the National Identity Management Commission, Federal Road Safety Corps, Nigerian Immigration Service, and other relevant federal agencies. Ordinarily, any person holding a National Identity Card, Driver’s Licence, or International Passport should be able to cast his votes without PVC.
In the United States of America, the voter’s card is the voting instrument, but other means of identification are equally acceptable. The United Kingdom (UK) has a similar legal framework. Until the passing of its Elections Act in 2022, no form of photographic identification was required to vote in England, Wales, and Scotland. Schedule 1 of the Electoral Act lists a wide array of identification acceptable at polling stations such as passports issued by the UK; Commonwealth or European Economic Area (EEA) states; drivers’ licences issued by the UK, Channel Islands, the Isle of Man or EEA state; biometric immigration document issued by the UK; Proof of Age Standards Scheme hologram card; Ministry of Defence identity card; concessionary travel pass; etc.
Given the humongous logistics and personnel costs expended in the voter registration exercise, INEC must carefully consider whether further issuance of fresh PVCs is still expedient. The Commission has often lamented about its insufficient budgetary allocations, and therefore, should disburse its allocated funds judiciously. It should also collaborate with relevant federal agencies regarding data synchronisation. The inter-agency relationship between the Corporate Affairs Commission and the Federal Inland Revenue Service regarding company registration is a classic illustration.
Not only will using other means of identification save costs, it would also greatly increase the voting population. For instance, teenagers, who become eligible to vote during an election period but would have been shut out of the registration process on age grounds, could cast their votes using other identification cards. In the same vein, other Nigerians who dread the stressful registration and PVC collection processes will be motivated to participate in elections if other means of identification are permissible.
