What Jega told Council of State on preparations for 2015

Presentation by the INEC Chairman, Professor Attahiru M. Jega,  to the National Council of State on preparations for the 2015 general elections.

Introduction

THE Commission, which I am privileged to chair, was inaugurated on June 30, 2010. We immediately reviewed what we inherited and in the little time we had, barely nine (9) months before the scheduled election, we introduced some policies, programmes and projects aimed at making the 2011 elections free, fair and credible. 

  In April 2011, we conducted the general elections, which have been adjudged free, fair and credible and the best in Nigeria’s recent electoral history.

  Immediately after the elections, INEC conducted a comprehensive review of what we did and the challenges confronted, as a result of which we introduced many policies, programmes and projects to enable INEC do better in the 2015 general elections (see attachment 1). 

  All of these have been successfully implemented, giving us the confidence that we have done a lot more than we did before the 2011 general elections and that the 2015 general elections should be remarkably much better than that of 2011.

Current state of preparedness

  This presentation focuses on the current status of INEC’s preparations for the conduct of the February 2015 general elections. It identifies the main issues that need to be accomplished by the commission for the successful conduct of the elections and highlights what has been done so far in respect of each one of them. (To guarantee successful conduct of the elections, there are many other things that need to be done by other stakeholders, notably, security agencies, candidates, political parties, voters, etc., which are outside the control of INEC.

Publishing of the Register of Voters for the elections

  Section 20 of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) requires that INEC prepares and publishes a Register of Voters 30 days before the date scheduled for the elections. We have prepared the Register of Voters for the elections, which we published on January 13, 2015, within the legally prescribed timeframe. 

  We have made copies of this register available to all the registered political parties. The certified and published Register has 68,833,476 registered voters.

  Indeed, the printing of the PDF hard copies of the Register of Voters to be used for the elections in polling units and voting points has commenced in virtually all the states. 

  Initial challenges, caused by late delivery of new printers, which delayed commencement in some states, have since been overcome.

Production and distribution of the Permanent Voter Cards

  The Electoral Act 2010 (as Amended) (See sections 16 and 49(1)) requires that INEC issue permanent voter cards (PVCs) to voters, which they have to present to the presiding officer at the polling unit on the day of the election. INEC has endeavoured to produce PVCs for all the voters on the Register.

  As of Monday, February 2, 2015, the total number of PVCs for the 36 states and FCT, which have been produced, delivered and taken to them for distribution to voters is 66,323,850 or 96 per cent of the total.

  As at this date, there are balances of Continuous Voters Registration (CVR) cards for 7 states, which have been produced and shipped but would arrive thus: for 4 states expected on February 3rd, and for 3 states expected on February 4th. The total number of cards in this category is 1,365,552 or 1.98 per cent of the total.

  There are PVCs, which have been stolen before they were collected by their owners, or which were damaged, or which were for people who have done transfers, and which the commission had decided to reproduce. These are being done here in Abuja. The total number in this category is 1,144,074 or 1.66 per cent.

  As at February 3, 2015, out of the 66,323,850 PVCs already taken to the states for distribution, a total of 45,098,876 or 65.81 per cent of the total have been collected by voters (Attachment 2). Thus, about 34 per cent of the PVCs are yet to be collected by the voters.

  Our initial methodology for distribution of PVCs, given budgeting constraints, was: to distribute PVCs at the polling unit level, where registration took place, for 3 days, at the end of which, the remaining PVCs were taken to INEC LGA offices, from where voters, who could not collect, would be able to collect them until January 31, 2015. Evidently, many voters did not, or could not, collect at the INEC LGA offices.

  In the past 3 weeks, in response to public complaints, we have introduced additional measures to help increase the rate of collection before the elections. For example, we have extended the period of collection on weekdays and introduced collection on weekends; we have further decentralised collection from INEC LGA offices to the Ward level; and we have shifted the deadline for collection from January 31st to February 8th. If necessary, this can be further extended, but we prefer to cross the bridge when we get to it.

  We have also introduced innovative web and SMS-based facilities that would enable voters to find out whether they are on the register of voters, which polling unit they are registered in, and which ward they could go to collect their PVCs (Attachment 3).

  There are a couple of key questions to address: first, should INEC not conduct elections until every registered voter has collected his/her card? It is virtually impossible for every registered voter to collect his card (ill-health, travel, apathy, indolence, death, etc.). 

  Second, what rate or percentage of collection is acceptable for an election to take place (51%, 75%, or 90+%)? In this case, whatever percentage is agreed upon, it would imply that a date for the election could not be fixed until it is attained.

  Our assumption is that, since in the recent verifiable electoral history of our country, voter turnout in any election has never come close to 65 per cent, PVC collection rate of this irreducible minimum percentage point would or should be acceptable for the conduct of elections. More so because by the scheduled first date of the 2015 general elections, i.e., February 14, the rate of PVC collection would have by far exceeded this.

  In any case, the commission would appreciate advice on this matter.

Card Readers

  For the 2015 general elections, the commission has decided to introduce the use of Card Readers (CRs), which will be used on the day of election in every polling unit and voting point, to verify and authenticate the PVC presented by a voter. This is so as to eliminate or at least drastically minimise multiple voting and confer additional credibility to the electoral process. 

  The commission ordered for the production and delivery of 182,000 customised CRs, sufficient for the 150,829 voting points (VPs), plus redundancies. Out of this number, 154,500 have since been delivered and distributed to the states and FCT. The remaining balance of 27,500 have been produced and shipped and is expected on Wednesday, February 4th. 

  Configuration of the CRs sent to the states commenced last Thursday, January 28, 2015 and is now virtually completed, with minimal challenges. We have tested the durability and functionality of the CRs, using internally acceptable standards of quality assurance (QA) and are satisfied by the results. 

  We have worked out the modalities for using the CRs, which have been endorsed by the political parties, and which have now been incorporated into the Guidelines for the 2015 general elections. 

  Using the CRs has enormous advantages. First, once configured, it can only read PVCs issued by INEC. Second, it reads the embedded microchip in the card, not the barcode. Third, it enables authentication of the identity of the voter by matching his/her fingerprints with that stored on the chip. Fourth, it keeps a tally of all cards read, all cards verified/authenticated or not, with all their details. Fifth, this information can be sent to a central server using and SMS. Sixth, the stored information on the server would enable INEC audit results from polling units, as well as do a range of statistical analysis of the demographics of voting, something INEC has never been able to do effectively. Seven, the RA/Ward Collation Officer can use this information to audit PU result sheets and determine whether accreditation figures have been altered (a common feature of electoral fraud). 

  Using the CRs has two main challenges. What if a Card Reader fails? What if a person is verified but his fingerprint cannot be authenticated? We have worked with political parties and agreed on what to do if any of these arises. 

  In the highly unlikely event that a CR fails, we have enough spares to deploy before the end of accreditation at 1 pm and adjust the time to gain lost time. If we cannot replace before end of accreditation, then election in that voting point would be postponed to the following day when a new CR would be provided. 

  If a voter’s PVC has been read and his details verified, but his fingerprints cannot be authenticated, or he/she has no fingers, an incidence form would be written by the Presiding Officer of the voting point and the voter would then be accredited. Party Agents and Observers would be there to testify to this.

  The nation has invested a lot in the CRs and PVC technology and the commission believes that using them in the 2015 general elections would confer remarkable transparency and credibility to the electoral process. 

  There have been demands that the commission should revert to the use of Temporary Voters’ Cards (TVRs) issued during the 2011 registration and the subsequent Continuous Voters Registration (CVR). 

  The TVCs have no chips and therefore cannot be verified/authenticated by the CRs. Also, there were more than 4 million cases of multiple registration; people with TVCs, who have been removed from the certified Register of Voters for the 2015 elections, once the use of TVCs is allowed, many of these would inundate polling units on election day; their names will not be in the register, and they would start agitation that they have been ‘disenfranchised’, as was the case during the Anambra State governorship elections in November 2013. 

  In any case, people who collected PVCs no longer have TVCs because they used them to exchange for PVCs. Additionally, a high percentage of voters had to use the attestation forms provided to collect their PVCs due to loss of TVCs on account of floods, insurgency, etc.

Electoral Materials

FOR general elections, INEC procures and distributes to the states and FCT for use, huge quantities of what are referred to as non-sensitive, as well as sensitive, materials. The range of non-sensitive materials include: biros, gum, envelopes, forms, aprons, vests, bags, calculators, twines, posters, voting cubicles, etc. 

  Sensitive materials include: ballot papers, result sheets, Presiding Officer official stamps, etc. The current status of delivery in respect of key among these is high-lightered in the following subsections.

Non-sensitive materials

  We have procured all that needs to be procured and are now busy distributing these to INEC state and FCT offices, while they too are now busy distributing to the LGA offices. 

  INEC has a Central Storage facility in Abuja and six other zonal stores nationwide, one in each geo-political zone. Generally, procured items are taken to these stores before being distributed to the state offices. 

  There were delays in respect of sending the materials to Borno and Yobe States, because we have to keep them longer in the zonal store until adequate security arrangements have been made to transport them to the states. A couple of months ago, INEC’s state office in Yobe was damaged by insurgents and 11 Hilux vehicles carted away, and we have only recently renovated the office.

  Although timelines have been missed in respect of the supply/delivery of some of the non-sensitive materials to the states, in general, as at now, all the essential materials required for the successful conduct of the elections have been procured and are being distributed. 

  The distribution would certainly be completed well before the scheduled dates for the election. The commission receives daily feedback through Election Management System (EMS) platform and meeting with Directors.

Sensitive materials

  We have had to procure additional ballot boxes for the 2015 general elections. We have planned to use 3 separate ballot boxes for February 14 elections, one each for the presidential, senatorial and House of Representatives elections; and 2 ballot boxes on February 28, one each for the governorship and State House of Assembly elections. Virtually all of these have been delivered to the states, which are busy distributing them to the INEC LGA offices.

  We have also, since the middle of December 2014, finalised arrangements for the production of ballot papers and result sheets. Indeed, deliveries of these have commenced on schedule and the deadline for deliveries of all the sensitive materials is February 10 (for the last batch of elections scheduled for February 28). 

Printing and publication of Guidelines, Manuals, etc.

  Printing of Guidelines for the 2015 General Elections and Code of Conduct for Election Officials has been completed and they are being delivered to the states, to be completed by February 7th. Production of all manuals, maps, etc., is virtually completed and delivery is ongoing for states to be completed.

  In any case, electronic copies of all INEC publications, guidelines, regulations, manuals, etc., are uploaded onto our website: www.inec.gov.ng

Recruitment and training of Ad-hoc (Temporary) Election Personnel

  INEC has planned to use 4 Ad-hoc staff (Presiding Officer and Assistant Presiding Officers) per polling units and voting points, to be recruited primarily from the NYSC scheme and our tertiary education sector. In contrast, in 2011, we used an average of 3 Ad-hoc staff. 

  Together with Returning Officers, Collation Officers and Supervisory Presiding Officers, INEC requires a total of approximately 700,000 temporary election duty personnel (Attachment 4 and 4a).

  We have been able to gather information and establish a database of over 867,210 who have indicated interest to do the job (Attachment 5). The state offices have screened these, in close collaboration with the authorities of the NYSC and the tertiary institutions and are now finalising the recruitment. 

  A cascade-training programme has commenced (Attachment 6). Already, TEI Certified Masters Trainers, state trainers and SPOs have been trained; and EOs have also been trained. POs and APOs are to be trained from February 7-9; APOs to handle CRs will have an additional hands-on training on February 10, while training of COs and ROs is the last in the series, and all arrangements are on course for these.

  Given that larger number of Ad-hoc staff will be used in 2015 compared with 2011, training is slightly more challenging. For the POs and APOs in particular, we have planned to do a 3-day training, one day devoted to hands-on practical training as against the 2-day training we did in 2011. 

  With the benefit of hindsight, and given the new technology of PVC and CR, we could do with more days of especially hands-on training for POs and APOs. Regrettably, we can’t do that due to funding constraints. 

  Also, a more decentralised LGA level training with smaller numbers in a classroom would have been ideal, but we can’t do that due to funding constraints.

Public enlightenment, sensitisation and voter education

  In a country the size and complexity of Nigeria, public enlightenment, sensitisation and voter education are circumscribed by enormous challenges. This notwithstanding, INEC has done its best under the circumstances. 

  For example, we have a new communication policy and strategy, we have more funds budgeted compared to 2011, and the development partners, especially EU through the UNDP-managed DGD Programme, have provided needed support and assistance.   

  We also partner with civil society organisations and other stakeholders to do sensitisation and voter education. Our messages range from information on electoral timelines, to advocacy for collection of PVCs, for peaceful, non-violent conduct by all, especially the youth, to explanations about voting procedures and other electoral regulations.

  We currently use multiple media channels and outlets for these activities, from radio, TV, newspapers, traditional media to on-line Internet resources. We also use posters, leaflets, handouts, etc.

  However, a lot more still needs to be done by all stakeholders to intensify voter education, as we get close to the dates of the elections.

Conclusion

  From the preceding review of the state of preparedness of INEC, in respect of matters under its control, it is clear that in spite of the discernable challenges, things are not as bad as they have been made to appear in recent media coverage and public discourses. We are doing our best under very difficult circumstances.

  In determining whether or not INEC is adequately prepared to conduct the February 2015 elections, as scheduled, we should separate what is under the control of the commission and what is outside its control. For the things under the commission’s control, our accomplishments are to such a degree that we can conduct the election, in spite of the identifiable challenges. 

  Compared with the 2011 general elections, for instance, our systems are definitely more robust now. Among others, we have a greatly improved register of voters, having removed over 4 million multiple registrants; voters will use PVCs; and accreditation, using Card Readers, will reduce the likelihood of fraud. 

  Consequently, although our state of preparedness may not be 100 per cent or perfect, and although a bit more time of additional preparation would enable us improve and perfect the current level of preparedness, we believed that we are ready for the elections as planned.

 However, we also believe that it is necessary to take into context the things outside the control of the commission, such as the attitude of politicians, political parties, candidates and voters, and significantly, security for election personnel, materials and voters, especially in areas under insurgency, which only the appropriate authorities can definitely speak on. 

  No matter the extent of our readiness, if there are serious security concerns, the successful conduct of free, fair, credible and peaceful elections would be greatly jeopardised. 

  INEC has been working with these authorities, especially under the Inter-agency Consultative Committee on Election Security (ICCES), but our concerns have not been assuaged. I am sure that this august body will also be apprised of the security situation for the elections by the responsible authorities. 

  Yesterday, for example, we received a letter from the office of the NSA, informing us of recent developments in 4 of the Northeast States, stating that safety and security cannot be guaranteed during the proponed election period, adducing reasons why this is so, and strongly advising that INEC considers rescheduling the elections by at least 6 weeks, within the provisions of the electoral legal framework, and within which time span it is hoped to restore sufficient normalcy for elections to hold. 

  This is a new development that INEC cannot certainly ignore or take lightly.

  I thank you for the opportunity to provide this briefing.