J. Obi Oguejiofor
Public Forum
A few days before the November 6 governorship election in Anambra State, some billboards appeared in some parts of the state with the message: “Make you no sell your vote o! Your future better pass chicken change!”
This plea is loaded with implications. First, there is the possibility or actual attempt at vote-buying in the election. Second and more importantly, whatever amount that will be used to buy a vote amounts to “chicken change” in comparison with the evil that vote-buying entails for the future of the state. In simple terms, vote-buying creates an oxymoron placed side by side with the desideratum of efficient public financial management that leads to general improvement of the state, which the culture of vote-buying certainly hampers.
The election is now over. A governor-elect has emerged and, unless there are surprises from the courts, the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) will again form the next government in Anambra State. In the presence of euphoria for victory and sadness for losing, there is hardly any critical voice in Anambra analyzing the election to evaluate and highlight the negative factors or practices that are increasingly determining the outcome of gubernatorial elections in the state.
The question is, how far was the advice “Make you no sell your vote” heeded? And to what extent did vote-buying impact on the outcome of Anambra governorship election?
The unequivocal answer to the first question is that the advice of not selling one’s vote was kept only in the breach. There was vote-buying in most polling booths. The spread of the practice followed the social levels of the areas where the booths were located. In areas where more educated or well-to-do sections of the population lived, there were very little or no attempts at vote-buying.
But such areas constituted a minimal percentage of the distribution of population in the state. They were concentrated in the housing estates, and the so-called GRAs, located in the urban areas. The story was very different in the villages and the lowbrow areas of the towns. In addition, the low turnout (about 10 per cent) was even weaker among the economically and socially better placed.
Vote-buying, in fact, enabled the turnout to reach 10 per cent, since many “hungry” voters came out to take advantage of the “chicken change” doled out at the polling booths.
As for the impact of vote-buying on the outcome of the election, it must be said that, given its spread and the high sums expended for votes, it was perhaps the most potent factor that determined the outcome of the election. No doubt there are other variables in any election: the popularity of the parties, the popularity of their candidates, the performance of the party in power, the efficiency of campaign organization, the financial war chest of the parties, etcetera. If a combination of these variables were to play strong roles in the past election, it would be near impossible for APGA to win.
First, before the election APGA was almost in a complete shambles. There was no better show of its internal disorder than the kangaroo primary it organized, disqualifying all the credible candidates with flimsy excuses, and leaving the preferred candidate with virtually nobody to contend with. That an APGA sitting Deputy Governor migrated to another party showed how far the party had become dysfunctional. That three factions emerged at a point indicated the absence of leadership. Secondly, its candidate, Charles C. Soludo, was, no doubt, very well known, but that was equally matched with many negative and unflattering perceptions, which he garnered through his years in public office.
Thirdly the APGA government led by Governor Willie Obiano cannot speak of serious positive records. The profligacy of his government is legendary and the effect is seen in many aspects of the state’s life that recorded degradation under his watch. After eight years of governance, the only thing that Obiano can boast of is a veritable landing strip in the name of an international airport with just one small building serving as departure and arrival halls.
There is also the ill-conceived international conference centre right before the uncompleted Dora Akunyili Women Development Centre. These two projects are said to be legacy projects. In reality, it is a non-performing governor that looks for special legacy projects. After eight years in office, Obiano will leave the state as one of the most indebted in Nigeria, with completely collapsed infrastructure, especially roads, and, of course, a retinue of kleptocratic nouveaux riches.
The performance of the parties in the election was direct index of their effort at vote-buying. The parties that doled out more money at the polling booths were the ones that took the first to the forth places in the results: APGA, PDP, APC and YPP. Why then did APGA win the election? One reason is that the party has been in governance long enough in the state to have a number of entrenched people who would gain by its continuity in power. The spread of such people in the nooks and crannies of the state offers a very good advantage. But that advantage would not have much effect without vote-buying. It only means that the huge amount of money needed to buy votes had better avenues of distribution than other parties. Again, the amount the party distributed was made public either by default or by design. It was known just a day to the election how much the party sent to each ward in the state for vote-buying. With that publicity, it was more difficult to swindle other party members and embezzle the money for vote-buying.
Given this stark reality, how should one read the action of the Gov. Obiano, who gave a gift of a million naira to congratulate a woman who refused to take money from a rival political party? The action was just hypocritical, since he was the leader of a party that benefited most from vote-buying. Would the woman have received any gift if what she rejected was APGA’s attempt at vote-buying? Again, what does one say of religious leaders who called for prayers to thank God for a free and fair election? Given the impact of vote-buying, they are either arrantly ignorant, insensitive or outrightly mendacious.
Vote-buying is increasing astronomically as the surest way of winning elections. It is practiced in many parts of the country but Anambra State seems to be a clear leader in embracing this infamy.
In the elections of 2019, the highest amount doled out for one vote was N9,000 at just one ward in Anambra West LGA. In the last election, the parties paid up to N15,000 to N25,000 per vote in some highly contested wards and polling units.
The implication is that democracy is threatened to the core, if the strongest factor in winning election is how much is used to buy votes and how well organized that criminal action is. It means that all other factors, including the will of the electorate, become secondary. At a point in this spiral of degeneracy, democracy becomes obliterated. One candidate in the election, Dr. Obiora Okonkwo, said: “If Satan himself were to be a candidate on November 6 and dispensed very efficiently as high as conceivable amount in vote-buying, he would have won the election.”
There is no better analogy to express the danger inherent in this practice.
Why has there been virtual silence on the part of Anambra leaders? The answer might be that vote-buying has been accepted as part of the process of winning election and the leaders are thus inured to the practice. When it was rearing its head in the past, the reaction of many religious leaders was to mount campaigns in the churches condemning the practice and urging the people to take the money and vote according to their conscience. In the November 6 election, there was absolute silence partly because the parties made sure they paid after ensuring that they were voted for. It means that religious leaders in Anambra have virtually ceased to be the conscience of the people; they are no longer appalled!
The traditional rulers do not have much clout anymore, having been cowed by the government of Obiano. Civil society organisations are rather weak in Anambra, and election observation has become virtually useless over time.
Other political parties who should strongly protest the practice that is squarely against the law are either incapable or too demoralized to raise a hue. In the presence of this evil, the festering question becomes “who will bell the cat?”
• Rev. Fr. Oguejiofor is a professor of philosophy at Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka