As Anambra’s 2021 gubernatorial poll draws to a close, a few important but often neglected points about the role of election observers in ensuring a seamless electoral process are worth reflecting on.
According to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), a total of 18 political parties are currently jostling for the much-coveted governorship seat of one of Nigeria’s smallest states by landmass.
Already, the atmosphere leading to the elections has been one characterised by extreme brinkmanship and political distrust – on one hand between the candidates, and on the other, between federal powers and indigenous (pro-IPOB) agitators. There are also concerns that the heavy presence of security officials could lead to voter intimidation, high-handedness, and state-sponsored manipulations such as ballot snatching.
Yet, in all these, the roles of election observers in ensuring that the electoral process is democratically legitimate are quite crucial. Earlier, INEC had announced that it accredited 72 domestic election observation groups and 5 foreign observation missions to observe the Anambra election. While it is not clear whether all the accredited groups truly mobilised observers to the field, some of the big players in the domestic election observation industry —including the CDD, YIAGA Africa, Civil Society Situation Room, among others— have already issued pre-election reports and ‘preliminary’ statements on the elections.
Following global conventions, these reports have focused on key areas of pre-election readiness assessment, such as: logistics and transportation of voting materials; voter turnout and voter’s conduct at the polling units; election security environment; and noteworthily, INEC’s deployment of a new voter’s verification tool called the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS). Such is the variety of issues that election observation groups engage with during elections.
Beyond assessing the overall conduct of elections, such as the fairness of the election management body (EMB) or the accuracy of election results, most observation groups are concerned with an overarching goal of ensuring that elections are conducted according to the highest democratic standards.
This is why election observation often extends beyond actual voting day to weeks or even months of pre- and post-election activities known as ‘’long-term observation’’, which addresses details of the overall electoral process. Even more than they do their pronouncement on election quality, observers attach greater importance to their recommendations on elections.
These recommendations are often contained in final observation reports, providing actionable policies for the improvement of Nigeria’s electoral process. In the past, recommendations from observers have led to major amendments in Nigeria’s electoral laws, such as the introduction of the Parallel Voter’s Tabulation Process (PVT) in the counting and collation of results.
While election observation groups try to dissociate themselves from the simplistic idea that their major duty in elections is to detect and deter electoral fraud, much of the conventional conversation around elections in Nigeria rarely spotlight their work beyond fraud deterrence and prevention of election manipulation. Instead, there is a disproportionate focus on what observers have to “say” about overall election results – often reflected in questions like “was the election free and fair?”, “is the outcome credible?”, and many more.
Interestingly, these perceptions of fraud deterrence and accountability aspects of observers’ work is more common among media organisations, who are often interested in headline reporting such as, for instance, “YIAGA Africa says the election was credible”. This is especially the case for “off-cycle” elections like Anambra’s that tend to gain very focused attention from a wide number of people due to their timing. While not blanketly accusing the entire Nigerian media of misrepresentation, focusing on observers’ overall assessment of elections alone, at the expense of other details in the observation reports brings a great risk of misrepresenting election observers.
Already, pockets of headlines on observers’ views of the Anambra election have been making the rounds, even before the conclusion of the electoral process. Such constant updates are good, as they point to a well-engaged and vibrant media environment in the country. However, it is important that media outlets pay proportionate attention to both the negative and positive evaluations coming from observers, rather than an undue focus on negative headlines crediting observers with statements on the occurrence of electoral violence and other forms of manipulation.
Of course, media houses are not expected to highlight the positive aspects of observers’ reports only. Rather, the argument here is that news content must make efforts to show a panoramic view of observers’ activities and reflect the thoroughness and sophistication of the reports or preliminary statements. Admittedly, some recent headlines about election observers and the Anambra polls are well-balanced.
Over the next couple of days, it is expected that the Nigerian media headlines will be suffused with news about observers’ assessment of the Anambra elections, as a way to prove the credibility or otherwise of the electoral process. However, there are a couple of important points for the media and other professionals to bear in mind when reporting on election observers.
Firstly, it is noteworthy to recognise that election observers usually desist from making final verdicts on elections, especially when key parts of the electoral process like collation of results and the PVT are still ongoing. This is one reason observers release what they call “preliminary statements”, often with cautionary notes that the statements are not final verdicts of their assessment of the elections. Media outlets and individuals commenting on elections would therefore do well to acknowledge this nuance.
Besides, the media needs to recognise that it is not in election observers’ power to make pronouncements on election quality. Understandably, the Nigerian public has historically attributed too much power to election observers, forgetting that election observers’ role is simply to provide information for the citizens, not to come to a conclusion on the overall quality of the electoral process.
Globally, conclusions on election results and pronouncements such as “free and fair” or “credible” election outcomes are only within the remit of the election management body (in Nigeria’s case— INEC) to make. Even the more seemingly ‘powerful’ foreign missions such as the EU Election Observation Mission (EUEOM) and the African Union Election Observation Mission (AU- EOM) are subject to the Independent National Electoral Commission on key aspects of the electoral process, as they are invitees of the government. In relation to this, according to Nigeria’s electoral laws, observers do not have any power to intervene in the electoral process; such powers are only vested in election ‘monitors’ who are part of INEC’s election management structure.
Understanding these nuances about the work of observer groups is important if we must report on election observation groups accurately and not misrepresent their views on the Anambra election.