By Daniel Kanu
Elder statesman, Chief Olu Falae was the presidential candidate in the 1999 election on the Joint Platform of the Alliance for Democracy (AD) and the All Peoples Party (APP). He was also a finance minister, former Secretary to the Government of the Federation, and former national chairman of Social Democratic Party (SDP), before his retirement from active politics.
The consummate politician-cum-technocrat told Sunday Sun during an encounter that without transparency in future elections the nation’s democracy will be in jeopardy, hence the need to embrace e-transmission of election results in the Electoral Act.
He also spoke on PIB, saying that three per cent is way too low and unfair to the oil producing areas.
He remained unequivocal in his belief that restructuring not zoning will solve Nigeria’s problem and accelerate development.
The Baale of Oluabo and Gbobaniyi of Akure cautioned that the country on going on the wrong track, saying that the leadership needs to re-examine its governance actions. Excerpt:
Let’s begin this chat by knowing your take on the controversy against the e-transmission of election results?
All that I can tell you is that for Nigeria to survive, for our democracy to survive, for election to be credible, we must do all that is necessary to ensure transparency. If we don’t for whatever reason we are compromising the future and stability of Nigeria. The world has passed the stage where one section will manipulate elections and hope that that will give them power with which they can lord it over the other people. Unless there is fairness and transparency, no democracy can survive. So, the electronic transmission of result makes the process more transparent in my opinion and, therefore, is to be preferred to any other alternative. That is my opinion. There are some people that are saying that the electronic system can be hacked and the results perverted, it is possible, but we cannot because of that fail to do what the rest of the world is doing to ensure that there is general acceptance and confidence in election result. It is the very bedrock on which democracy rotates, the bedrock on which democracy is built.
One of the arguments against electronic transmission is that there may be areas that do not have network and as such voters may be disenfranchised during the election?
What you do if such situation arises anywhere is to allow the electronic system to be used wherever possible and where it is not possible let an alternative system be used. There is always an alternative in such situations. If let’s say, for instance, 80 per cent of e-voting is achieved then you use the other method in the remaining 20 per cent. It should be seen that we are trying and not because of the minority of the case where network is not available then because of that you cancel e-voting for the whole country? That doesn’t make sense and that cannot be accepted.
What is also your take on PIB?
The National conference where I was a delegate took a decision on how to share those resources and I will recommend to anybody who cares to listen that what we agreed at the conference is the best that has been agreed by consensus on the matter. Three per cent is way out of what we recommended. Let anybody who is interested go and see the document we produced in the 2014 Confab and you will see how detailed we were and the percentage that we recommended. Look anything that is unfair people will resent it, they will oppose it and they will agitate and there will be instability and disagreement. So, they should try to avoid controversy by negotiating and compromising. When you do things like this; trying to force it on the people, you will create a problem. It is not the way to run a country. It always helps to speak to the other side and negotiate and take a step forward, and they too will take a step forward and you meet in the middle. I don’t think three per cent should be rammed down the throat of people in the oil producing area. But let us remember also that there are other resources that are not necessarily hydrocarbon that is not oil not gas. There are other solid minerals in other parts of Nigeria, what will be their reaction if three per cent is offered to them? It is then food for thought. I have said it and will continue to repeat it at any forum that Nigeria needs restructuring without further delay. It is a solution if we are serious with salvaging this country. Restructuring not zoning is the best way forward. In the 2014 National Conference all knotty issues were discussed and everything was agreed on consensus, I think any serious government should look at that document. We are simply walking in circles the way we are conducting governance and we have to be careful of the consequences.