By Ayodele Oni 

Ahead of 2027 elections, Archbishop John Cardinal Onaiyekan has advocated for reforms in the electoral umpire and the judiciary.

Onaiyekan pointed out that the Independent National Electoral Commission, (INEC), must be seen to be truly independent while the judiciary must desist from unjust judgments by some judges in election tribunals. 

The archbishop who spoke on “The Ballot The Media and The Task Of Keeping Democracy Alive,” at this year’s All Nigeria Editors Conference, also doubted government neutrality during elections. 

“INEC, that is supposed to conduct the elections has its own issues and problems, mainly because it is set up by government and controlled by the government, which itself, during elections, is no longer only government, but also a contestant in the electoral struggles. 

“The INEC is supposed to be independent by definition, Independent National Electoral Commission. But it is doubtful how independent it is or can be. And this is linked also to how transparently it can perform. 

“INEC is often under pressure from politicians who try to force it to play in their favour. But when the politicians are themselves the government in power, it becomes very problematic for INEC to be truly independent and transparent.

“We need to review the method of appointment of the INEC, the Chairman and the commissioners. They should not depend on Mr. President and the governors, who are themselves contestants in elections. 

“The approval of the legislature, which is supposed to provide checks and balance, has become mere routine. This is more blatant at the level of the State Electoral Commissions, where they routinely fill the state houses of assembly with the governor’s boys and girls. 

“We need to borrow a leaf from other nations where formulae have been designed to ensure an independent electoral commission that does not depend on the government in power.”

The religious leader pointed out that the judiciary, which is supposed to be the last stage in the electoral process, has no tole in announcing election results.

“It should be stressed that the judiciary is not to determine elections about who wins, but rather to adjudicate disputes when they arise. 

“If elections were well conducted, there ought not to be any need for judicial cases. The tribunals were supposed to be there just in case. 

“But our experience in the recent past has almost become that we have been witnessing a situation where our elections are being determined not at the polls, but in the courts by the tribunals. 

“And this gives a field day for high-class lawyers with high-level fees, doing their best to manipulate issues on technicalities. There are allegations that are difficult to deny of unjust judgments by some judges in election tribunals. 

“The performance of the judiciary in recent elections has seriously dented the image of this hallowed institution. I do hope that efforts are being made to regain the trust of the people in the courts in these matters.”

On elections, Onaiyekan noted that Nigeria has not been making progress in the conduct of elections.

“In Nigeria, we have had several elections since 1999. It is difficult to believe that we have been making progress. In fact, it seems that the quality of the elections has been reducing from one election to the other, and this is not good news at all.

“There is the conduct of politicians who have an attitude of do-or-die, to win at all costs. This is because they see elections as a struggle for power, which brings wealth and influence. 

“In all this, the people hardly count at all. Rather, they are just pawns on the political game.

“We often hear about the factor of incumbency during elections. Regimes in power at both national and state levels have found it difficult to allow a level-playing field for other political contestants with whom they are competing. 

“State resources are blatantly captured and deployed for partisan political activities, with little or no qualms. We see this when a state governor can boast of delivering 100% of the votes in his state to his preferred presidential candidate. 

“If it is a joke, it is very bad taste. Where is the freedom of the people of the state to vote according to their individual consciences? Or does the governor intend to vote for everybody in his state?”

The religious leader also raised concern about the security agencies, who he ssid are supposed to secure the environment and give people the space to freely cast their votes. 

“They are supposed to work with professionalism, no intimidation, no harassment of the people. But when security agents, with their paraphernalia of force, are all over the place with sirens blaring everywhere, people are intimidated and many are even afraid to come out to vote. 

“The overwhelming presence of security agents during elections is not a good thing for our nation. We can borrow a leaf, from other countries who conduct their elections quietly, without declaring public holidays or curfews across the nation.”