election observation report 2015 (published copy)
Post on 21-Jan-2017
393 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Edited by Adebayo Adebukola
INCLUSION OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES IN THE CONDUCT OF THE 2015 GENERAL ELECTIONS IN NIGERIA:
ELECTION OBSERVERS REPORT
pg. 2
© Disability Policy and Advocacy Initiative (DPAI) & Lagos State Civil Society Partnership
(LACSOP), July, 2015.
This document may be reproduced in any accessible formats and circulated through any
medium strictly for public use with adequate reference to the Publishers - Disability Policy
and Advocacy Initiative (DPAI), Nigeria and Lagos State Civil Society Partnership
(LACSOP), Nigeria.
No part or whole of this document shall be reproduced for commercial purposes without the
permission of its Publishers, DPAI and LACSOP.
This document may be downloaded from the websites of DPAI, LACSOP and its
Development Partners.
Disclaimer
The content of this document does not represent the views of DFID-SAVI which provided
support for the processes leading to its making and publishing.
The core content of this Report was developed at a 4-day Technical Review and Report
Drafting Session held at the Lagos office of DFID-SAVI, attended by 15 participants (See
Appendix A for full list of participants) and facilitated by Rommy Mom, DFID-SAVI‘s
Federal Programme Manager and Felix Obanubi, DFID-SAVI‘s Lagos State Team Leader
Final compilation and editing of this document was done by Dr.Adebukola Adebayo, Director
General, HORDC and Director, Research &Programmes, Disability Policy Advocacy
Initiative (DPAI).
Graphic design, illustration and photo analysis was provided by AkinolaEmmanuella,
coordinator, Disability Awareness and Development Initiative, and Director of Media and
Publicity, DPAI.
Special review and analysis of relevant local and international election related statutes was
provided by Barrister Daniel Onwe, member and Legal Adviser to DPAI.
Data entry and Statistical computation was provided by KehindeKuforiji, member, LACSOP.
July, 2015.
pg. 3
TABLE OF CONTENT
Preface
Acknowledgement
List of Abbreviations
Executive Summary
Chapter 1: Inclusive Electoral Process in Nigeria: Issues and Perspectives
1.0 Background
1.1 Rationale for Inclusive Electoral Process (right to vote and be voted for)
1.2 Problems of Electoral Inclusion and Accessibility in Nigeria
1.3 Characteristics of Inclusive Elections
1.4 Stakeholders in the Conduct of Inclusive and Accessible Electoral Process
1.4.1 Political Parties
1.4.2 Civil Society Organizations CSOs
1.4.3 POLICE/SECURITY
1.4.4 MEDIA
1.4.5. National and State Legislatures
1.4.6. Election Management Bodies EMBs
1.5 Advocacy for Inclusive and Accessible 2015 General Elections
Chapter 2- International Regional and State laws on inclusive policies
2.0 Introduction
2.1 Electoral Laws and Experiences in Inclusive Elections: 1977 to 2010
2.2 INEC Strategic Programme of Action 2012-2016
2.3 Provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria for the
Conduct of Inclusive and Accessible Electoral Process
2.4 Contributions of State Disability Laws to the conduct of Inclusive and Accessible
Electoral Process in Nigeria
pg. 4
2.4.1 Ekiti State Rights of Persons with Disabilities Law 2013
2.4.2 Lagos State Special Peoples Law, 2011
2.5 Contributions of International Statutes to the conduct of Inclusive and Accessible
Electoral Process in Nigeria
2.5.1 The African Charter on Human and Peoples Right (ACHPR)
2.5.2 United Nations Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD)
2.6 Summary
Chapter 3- Descriptive Analyses of Activities during and After the 2015 General
Election
3.0 Introduction
3.1 Pre-election
3.2 During election
3.2.1 Presidential and National Assembly Elections
3.2.2 Gubernatorial and State Assemblies Elections
3.3 Post Election
3.4 Summary
Chapter 4- Quantitative Analysis of Observations from the 2015 General Elections
4.0 Introduction
4.1 Methodology
4.1.1 Design
4.1.2 Population
4.1.3 Sample Size and Sampling Method
4.1.4 Methods of Observation, Data Collection and Analysis
4.1.5 Limitations
4.2 States-by-State Presentation and Analysis of Data
4.2.1 General Summary
4.3 Zonal Analysis
4.3.1 General Summary
pg. 5
Chapter 5- Major Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations
5.1 Major Findings
5.2 Conclusion
5.3 Recommendations
5.3.1 The Role of Media Organizations
5.3.2 The Role of Security Agencies
5.3.3 The Role of National and State Legislatures
5.3.4 The Role of Local and International Development Agencies
5.3.5 The Role of Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)
5.3.6 The Role of Political Parties
Appendix A- Attendance List for a 4-Day Review Session on 2015 General Election
Appendix B- Monitoring Checklist on Inclusive Electoral Process
Appendix C- Mandate Protection Factsheet
Appendix D–Voter and Civic Education Leaflet
pg. 6
PREFACE
The resolution by DPAI and LACSOP to embark on the observation of the 2015 general
elections was born out of the need to sustain its advocacy for inclusive and accessible
electoral process for persons with disabilities (PWDs) in Nigeria which it commenced in
January 2014.
One key outcome of the DPAI and LACSOP advocacy in 2014 was the first ever production
of a Monitoring Checklist on Inclusive Electoral Process in Nigeria. The draft of the
Monitoring Checklist was presented to the Chairman and Management of the Independent
National Electoral Commission (INEC) for its input on July 22nd
2014. The Draft Monitoring
Checklist was also validated by other stakeholders including disability groups, the media,
political parties and other mainstream CSOs at a Meeting held in Abuja on 14th
November,
2014 with the support of DFID-SAVI, International Republican Institute (IRI) and the
National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). Following INEC‘s pledge to adopt the
Checklist, copies were forwarded to the INEC Head Quarters and same were deployed to all
its state offices across Nigeria. INEC also used the Checklist for the training of its staff in
preparation for the 2015 general elections.1,2
Further engagements of DPAI and LACSOP with INEC before the general elections also lead
to the first ever production of voter and civic education materials including media jingles in
formats accessible to the deaf and the blind persons in Lagos and across the country. INEC
also ensured the PWDs were adequately represented and provided for at all it‘s public and
citizens‘ consultative forum and programmes. Most significantly, INEC announced its
implementation of a policy on ―Priority Voting‖ which provided that voters with disabilities,
elderly voters and pregnant women be given priority attention during voter registration,
accreditation and voting.
Accordingly, it would only be apt to expect that these interventions would make substantial
positive impacts on the conduct of the general elections. Based on this expectation, DPAI and
LACSOP collaborated with Transition Monitoring Group (TMG) to deploy the Monitoring
Checklist for the observation of the 2015 general elections in 10 states, spread across 5 geo-
political zones in Nigeria.
This book, therefore, is a compilation of DPAI and LACSOP‘s reports which emanated from
the observation of the Presidential, National Assembly, Gubernatorial and State Assembly
elections in 2015. The five chapters in the book was developed at a four-day Technical
Review Session on the Observation of the 2015 General Election; facilitated by Rommy
Mom, DFID-SAVI‘s Federal Programme Manager and Felix Obanubi, DFID-SAVI‘s State
Team Leader in Lagos State; held at the SAVI-Lagos office on 5th
to 8th
May, 2015.
This five-chapter publication, documents critical issues, perspectives, rationale, challenges
and stakeholders inclusive electoral process in its first chapter. The chapter also highlights
key advocacy strategies adopted by DPAI and LACSOP as well as the major outcomes
attained there from.
1 This statement is credited to a senior staff of INEC in Lagos who reported that “INEC received copies of the
Monitoring Checklist and has deployed same during training of adhoc and permanent staff…”
2Reports were also received from Anambra state of INEC’s receipt of the Monitoring Checklist and its use for
training activities.
pg. 7
The book reviews major local and international legislative and policy documents and
frameworks in the second chapter with a view to identifying the scope and effectiveness of
provisions contained thereof to promote inclusivity and accessibility needs of PWDs.
However, in the third and fourth chapters, the book presents both narrative and quantitative
analysis of observations from the 2015 general elections.
The fifth and final chapter presents major findings from the observation exercise. The chapter
also draws critical conclusions on the prospects of inclusive electoral process in Nigeria;
while strategic recommendations targeting key stakeholders are enumerated.
Finally, the import and relevance of this book to the conduct of further advocacies and
awareness rising on issues of inclusive and accessible elections to PWDs cannot be
underestimated. It will also serve as a very strategic referential tool for stakeholders involved
in all aspects of designing, developing, planning, implementing, monitoring and evaluating
inclusive electoral process within and beyond Nigeria.
pg. 8
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
DPAI and LACSOP acknowledge and appreciate the tremendous contributions of civil
society partners across the 10 states that made huge sacrifice of time and other resources to
observe the inclusion, access and participation of persons with disabilities and other
vulnerable citizens in the 2015 general elections. We note with utmost regard, the
demonstration of understanding, creativity and ingenuity by all Observers despite obvious
technical and administrative shortcomings in the planning of the exercise.
We appreciate in particular, all CSO partners who directly contributed towards the
development of this Report during the 4-day Review and Report Development Meeting held
after the general elections in the Lagos office of DFID-SAVI between 5th
and 8th
May, 2015.
We sincerely appreciate all members of DPAI, LACSOP, JONAPWD, other CSO partners
and individuals who sacrificed time and intellect to initiate the entire advocacy project on
inclusive and accessible electoral process in Nigeria since January, 2014 when the desk
review was conducted in Lagos; the Southwest Stakeholders Validation Forum held on 12th
May 2014 in Ibadan; the National Stakeholders Review and Validation Forum held on 14th
November, 2014 in FCT Abuja; and the several planning meetings for the election
observation exercise.
We also express our sincere appreciation to all media organizations, Journalists and other
media practitioners who participated at the media dialogue held in May, 2014 and for
providing the media space for public awareness on issues of inclusive electoral process in
Nigeria.
We acknowledge the cooperation, support and partnership relationship provided by the state
and national offices of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) all through
the processes of the DPAI and LACSOP-lead advocacy on inclusive and accessible electoral
process in Nigeria. In particular, we appreciate INEC‘s nationwide adoption and use of the
Monitoring Checklist developed by DPAI and LACSOP; the support by the Lagos state
office of INEC for the production of the campaign posters on Priority Voting which was
designed by DPAI and LACSOP; as well as INEC‘s very responsive attitude towards ideas,
proposals and recommendations emanating from the entire advocacy process.
Finally, we express our profound gratitude to all the International Development Agencies
especially the Lagos and National offices of State Accountability and Voice Initiative (SAVI)
of the DFID and International Republican Institute (IRI) for the support they provided for the
entire advocacy process since January, 2014 to date, including the production of the
Monitoring Checklist and the observation exercise. We also acknowledge the support from
the International Republican Institute (IRI) in the production of the Monitoring Checklist and
the observation exercise.
pg. 9
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ACHPR: African Charter on Human and Peoples Right
ADA: Americans with Disabilities Act
CSOs: Civil Society Organizations
DDB: Disability Data-Base
DFID: Department for International Development
DPAI: Disability Policy and Advocacy Initiative
DPOs: Disabled People's Organizations
EMB: Election Management Body
HORDC: Human and Organizational Resources Development Centre
INEC: Independent National Electoral Commission
IDP: International Development Partners
IFES: International Foundation for Electoral Systems
IRI: International Republican Institute
JONAPWD: Joint National Association of Persons with Disabilities
LACSOP: Lagos State Civil Society Partnership
LGA: Local Government Area
NBC: Nigerian Broadcasting Commission
NDI: National Democratic Institute
NHRC: National Human Rights Commission
OCV: Out of Country Voting
PWDs: Persons with Disabilities
PU: Polling Unit
SAVI: State Accountability and Voice Initiative
SIEC: State Independent Electoral Commission
TMG: Transition Monitoring Group
UK: United Kingdom
pg. 10
UNCRPD: United Nations Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities
U.S: United States
VCEC: Voter and Civic Education and Communication
WHO: World Health Organization
pg. 11
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Elections are the hallmark of every representative democracy and it is required that every
eligible citizen participate equally and effectively in the process. The exclusion of any section
of the citizenry will not only amount to the breach of their fundamental rights, but will also
reduce the legitimacy and acceptability of any government which emerges from such process.
A critical review of Nigeria's democratic history especially since 1999 reveals a near total
exclusion of persons with disabilities (PWDs) from all aspects of the electoral process. In
spite of relevant provisions made by the 1999 Constitution, the 2010 Electoral Act and other
legislative and policy instruments, the inclusion and participation of PWDs in the electoral
process has been very marginal; basically limited to vote casting devoid of secrecy and
independence as prescribed by law and as enjoyed by other non-disabled citizens.
In 2014, the Lagos State Civil Society Partnership (LACSOP), the umbrella body for all
network of CSOs in Lagos State in partnership with Disability Policy and Advocacy Initiative
(DPAI) both supported by DFID‘s State Accountability and Voice Initiative (SAVI), IRI and
NHRC, considered it apt and timely to make a strategic intervention to conduct an advocacy
with critical stakeholders especially the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)
on possibilities of ensuring increased and improved participation of PWDs in the 2015
general elections.
The climax of these advocacies was the conduct of observation of the general elections in 10
states spread across 5 geo-political zones in Nigeria using a Monitoring Checklist which was
also developed in the course of the advocacies. The outcome of the election observation
which is contained in this book was harmonized and analysed at a 4-day Technical Review
Session held between 5th
and 8th
May, 2015 at the Lagos office of DFID-SAVI.
Based on the observation of the 2015 general elections conducted in 10 states across 5 geo-
political zones in Nigeria, and the outcome of desk review of relevant literature, the following
constitute major findings which should be considered for action:
(a) Existing electoral legislative and policy frameworks including the 1999 Constitution,
the Electoral Act 2010 and INEC‘s Strategic Plan for 2012-2016 are found to be
grossly insufficient and incapable of effectively promoting inclusive and accessible
electoral process in Nigeria.
(b) As observed in the 2015 general elections, the level of public awareness and
enlightenment on issues of inclusive electoral process in Nigeria is only fairly high.
However, it is grossly insufficient to elicit appropriate positive attitude and response
of the general public towards issues of inclusive electoral process.
(c) There is inadequate attention, contribution and commitment of relevant scholars,
professionals, development agencies and other stakeholders towards research and
development of inclusive electoral process in Nigeria.
(d) There is general lack of technical capacity on the part of EMBs, political parties, the
media, the Legislature, security agencies, CSOs and DPOs, as well as PWDs
themselves on issues and practices in inclusive electoral process.
(e) There is no disability data base (DDB) with regard to management and administrative
logistics and planning for the implementation of inclusive electoral process.
pg. 12
(f) The fairly high turn-out of voters with disabilities, elderly voters and women
(including pregnant women) in the 2015 general elections demonstrate their
willingness and capacity to effectively participate in an inclusive and accessible
electoral process once all technical, institutional, human and infrastructural
requirements are met.
(g) Implementation of INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting‖ is encouraging going by the
level of compliance observed. However, some observed trends suggest that this is not
sufficient to guaranty an inclusive electoral process.
(h) Observations reveal that the level of accessibility to polling units, electoral/voting
materials such as ballot papers for the blind; sing language interpretation for the deaf;
physical access for the physically challenged and simplified information for the
intellectually disabled are still very far-fetched in the attainment of inclusive and
accessible electoral process in Nigeria.
(i) It was observed that political parties, the media, and mainstream CSOs lack capacity
and courage to support interested PWDs to stand for elections at any level.
(j) It was also observed that the level of violence before, during and after elections as
well as intimidation by security officials are still significantly high to discourage
effective participation of PWDs, the elderly and women in the political process
In view of these findings, the following are some of the key recommendations proposed in
this Report:
(a) Actors in the media sector including regulators, media organizations and professionals
should give adequate attention, resources, support and commitment towards
promoting inclusion of PWDs in the electoral process.
(b) Security agencies and their officials should be properly trained to secure the electoral
process; exhibiting democratic attitudes and skills; and providing necessary support to
vulnerable voters including those with disabilities.
(c) National and state Legislatures should be enlightened on the need to enact disability
and gender-inclusive electoral laws, while also making sufficient financial
appropriation to provide for institutional and infrastructural requirements for the
conduct of inclusive elections.
(d) Local and International Development Agencies should institute policies and
programmes which promote inclusion and access for PWDs and other vulnerable
voters. It is also important that they draw funding conditions which compel EMBs,
political parties, the media and other stakeholders to make room for inclusion of
PWDs.
(e) EMBs (INEC and SIECs) should develop and implement disability-inclusive electoral
policies and programmes. They should also include disability-inclusion in all their
guidelines and other regulatory documents to compel other electoral actors to
mainstream inclusive behaviours. It is also important that EMBs do more to
effectively engage with PWDs and DPOs.
(f) Political parties should develop and implement disability-inclusion policies and
programmes; give quotas to PWDS interested in running for elective positions; as
well as employ qualified PWDs in their offices.
(g) CSOs should support citizens to develop more responsive attitudes towards PWDs
before, during and after elections. They should also mainstream disability issues in
their engagements with other electoral stakeholders.
pg. 13
Chapter 1
INCLUSIVE ELECTORAL PROCESS IN NIGERIA: ISSUES AND
PERSPECTIVES
1.0 Background
Elections are the hallmark of every representative democracy and it is required that every
eligible citizen participate equally and effectively in the process. The exclusion of any section
of the citizenry will not only amount to the breach of their fundamental rights, but will also
reduce the legitimacy and acceptability of any government which emerges from such process.
A critical review of Nigeria's democratic history especially since 1999 reveals a near total
exclusion of persons with disabilities (PWDs) from all aspects of the electoral process. In
spite of relevant provisions made by the 1999 Constitution, the 2010 Electoral Act and other
legislative and policy instruments, the inclusion and participation of PWDs in the electoral
process has been very marginal; basically limited to vote casting devoid of secrecy and
independence as prescribed by law and as enjoyed by other non-disabled citizens.
Since 1999, Nigeria‘s electoral process has been conducted in such a way that significantly
excludes vulnerable citizens especially PWDs. Not only are election laws and institutions
designed in such ways that limit the inclusions of PWDs, physical and social inclusion and
access are virtually denied. There are also poor and ineffective engagements between
Disabled People‘s Organizations (DPOs) and key stakeholders especially the mainstream
Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and the media in promoting issues of disability in the
electoral process.
Several attempts to reform the electoral process in 2001, 2006 and 2010 have resulted in little
or no improvements in the inclusion and access of PWDs to effectively participate in the
electoral process. However, since 2012, stakeholders including DPOs, CSOs and
International Development Partners (IDPs) have made tremendous efforts to take advantage
of on-going review of the 1999 Constitution and other socio-political reforms processes to
renew vigorous advocacies for the reform of the electoral process to enhance its inclusivity
and accessibility to PWDs.
In 2014, the Lagos State Civil Society Partnership (LACSOP), the umbrella body for all
network of CSOs in Lagos State in partnership with Disability Policy and Advocacy Initiative
(DPAI) both supported by DFID‘s State Accountability and Voice Initiative (SAVI) and IRI
considered it apt and timely to make a strategic intervention to conduct an advocacy with
critical stakeholders especially the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on
possibilities of ensuring increased and improved participation of PWDs in the 2015 general
elections.
1.1 Rationale for Inclusive Electoral Process (right to vote and be voted for)
The electoral process is one of the key pillars of any democratic system; this is because it
provides opportunity for every adult citizen to participate directly or indirectly in the
government and governance of the society at local, national and international levels. Through
elections, citizens are able to vote (elect or select) their representatives in government.
pg. 14
According to the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES, 2014), Elections
provide a unique opportunity to increase participation and change public perceptions about
the abilities of persons with disabilities. As a result, persons with disabilities can have a
stronger political voice and be increasingly recognized as equal citizens. This sets the stage
for on-going participation in their communities and social and economic integration.3
Involvement empowers persons with disabilities and positively shapes the political process
and democratization outcomes. It is therefore important to engage persons with disabilities
from the outset of program design. This ensures that persons with disabilities are also equal
partners who have a voice in decisions that affect their lives.
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) serves
as the international guiding framework for the implementation of inclusive electoral process
and provides the legal basis and a set of standards for the full and equal participation of
persons with disabilities in public life. Articles 29 and 12 are particularly relevant for
election-related activities. Details of this are discussed in the next chapter.
The electoral process consist of series of interrelated activities beginning from the enactment
of relevant electoral laws, policies and regulations; the establishment of the Election
Management Body (EMB); determining and planning for election dates, venues and time;
hiring and training of ad-hoc and permanent electoral officials; conduct of voters and civic
education on election; designing and deployment of election materials; conduct of voting;
counting of ballot; declaration of winners and settling of election disputes; preparation and
conduct of election monitoring; and, review and evaluation of conducted elections.
All these activities are expected to comply with all relevant local, national and international
legal and policy instruments which seek to guarantee that the electoral process must be
peaceful, free and fair. These instruments also provide that the electoral process should
guarantee equal access to, and participation of all citizens irrespective of their social, cultural,
and economic and disability status.
On the contrary, according to several studies, most electoral processes fall short of these
ethical and legal requirements especially the guaranteeing and enhancing of access and
participation of all adult citizens. The most electorally excluded section of the population has
been found to be largely made up of persons with various disabilities.
Persons with disabilities (PWDs) in all countries of the world suffer various forms of
electoral accessibility challenges, deliberately and/or ignorantly created by local and national
legal and policy instruments such as constitutions, electoral laws and other policy and
regulatory frameworks issued by EMBs.
Exclusion of PWDs from, and their inadequate access and participation in the electoral
process manifest in forms ranging from little or no consultation in the development of
electoral laws, policies and regulations; exclusion from participating in the administration of
EMBs; exclusion from the processes of designing and planning of election logistics including
voting materials, voting venues, etc; little or no involvement in the training of election
officials; little or no access to election and political media information; inaccessible ballot
3 The International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) (2014); Equal Access: How to include Persons
with Disabilities in Electoral and Political Processes. www.IFES.org
pg. 15
papers and voting machines, voting centres, etc; and exclusion
from election monitoring activities.
1.2 Problems of Electoral Inclusion and Accessibility in Nigeria
In spite of Nigeria‘s commitment to several relevant international conventions such as
UNCRPD, and the provisions made by the 1999 Constitution and the Electoral Act, 2010, the
Nigerian EMB, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is yet to establish a
truly inclusive and accessible electoral process. Since 1999, only very few PWDs have had
marginal participation; basically at the voting stages of elections. Most PWDs are completely
excluded from all aspects of the process.
1. Low Institutional Capacity:
Although INEC recently established designated Desks nationwide on
disability and inclusion matters to guide and ensure compliance with relevant
laws and policies. Observations reveal that most of the officers managing this
Desks are not persons with disabilities and lack adequate capacity to engage
with PWDs;
INEC does not currently have any data-base on population of Nigerians with
disabilities. INEC‘s voters registration process is not sensitive and adapted to
nature of disabilities;
INEC‘s permanent and ad-hoc staff lack the capacity to engage effectively
with PWDs in all stages of the electoral process.
2. Exclusion from Citizens Engagements on Election Matters:
There is no adequate inclusion of PWDs by INEC when conducting citizens
consultations on election matters;
Children and youths with disabilities are not effectively provided for in the
development and application of electoral and civic educational materials;
Citizens with disabilities are not usually effectively considered and captured
when preparing and disseminating electoral information and communication
materials.
3. Inaccessibility and Restriction of PWDs:
Picture: A polling unit sited in front of an open ditch which inhibits access to physically challenged persons.
pg. 16
Inaccessible polling centres for wheel chair users, lack of Braille ballots for
the blind, lack of sign language support for deaf persons and lack of provision
for persons with limb loss;
Inaccessible political parties' ads and campaign materials.
4. Exclusion from Election Monitoring and other Allied Matters
DPOs and PWDs have never had opportunity to participate in election
monitoring activities in Nigeria due to inadequate awareness on the part of
INEC, civil society groups and other stakeholders;
PWDs have been largely excluded from participating in political party
activities;
Civil society groups advocating for electoral reforms have excluded issues
affecting PWDs. There hasn‘t been remarkable engagements between
mainstream CSOs and DPOs on the need for inclusive electoral process in
Nigeria;
Since 1999, international and local development partners have not given
significant considerations to supporting DPOs and PWDs in their quest for
inclusive electoral process in Nigeria. Few efforts in the past have failed due
to poor follow-up programmes and the failure to secure adequate commitment
from INEC.
1.3 Characteristics of Inclusive Elections
Inclusion is the acceptance of all people regardless of their differences. It is about
appreciating people for who they are because even though we are all different, we are one.
Inclusion allows people to value differences in each other by recognizing that each person has
an important contribution to make to our society.4
As a social principle, inclusion presupposes that everyone is considered, consulted, involved,
has access to and participating in all social, economic and political processes, systems,
institutions at an equal level irrespective of status.
As an attitude or behaviour, inclusion becomes internalized by individuals as their way of life
or culture. It becomes an ethical code of conduct or principle which guides daily and every
activity especially when it is reinforced by legal, policy and institutional guides and practices.
According to Stuart Schleien, Fredrick Green, and Charlsena Stone, ―the concept of inclusion
is a continuum of three levels of acceptance ranging from a physical level to a social level.
Social inclusion, the final and highest level can be achieved only after the first two levels of
inclusion have been met.‖5
4Shafik Abu-Tahir as cited in Dattilo, 2002, p. 26
5Stuart Schleien, Fredrick Green, and Charlsena Stone (1999) Levels of Inclusion;
www.indiana.edu/~nca/leisureed/inclusion2.html
pg. 17
Inclusion: A Continuum of Acceptance
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Physical Integration Functional Inclusion Social Inclusion
An individual with
disability has the
right to access
public buildings
and facilities
including polling
centres.
He/she should have
unhindered access
to voting materials
including ballot
papers and boxes.
He/she should have
unhindered access
to all electoral
public information.
An individual with disability should
have a sense of fulfilment and the
opportunity to be successful within a
given environment. This may be
manifested in:
Participating in election
management activities;
Participate in all citizens
engagements including
consultations with EMBs;
Voting freely,
independently and with
utmost secrecy as required
by law;
Participating in election
monitoring; and
Participating in all manner
of lawful political activities.
Inclusion rooted in laws and
policies can only achieve
limited (legalistic and
institutional) compliance.
One's ability to participate in
positive social interactions
facilitated through electoral
and political activities is
internally motivated and it is
only by embracing inclusion as
a value that this level can be
achieved.
Social inclusion cannot be
mandated.6
Democracy becomes fully participatory only when there is equal, free and fair opportunity for
all citizens to participate in the social, economic and political space. According to Open Idea,
"Democracy (participatory governance) is either direct or indirect. Direct means holding
elected positions while indirect is by voting which is facilitated by inclusive elections -
involving and facilitating all, through the entire electoral process. Democracy - Participatory
governance: Inclusive elections explain globally that democracy means involving all in
decision making. It further states that participatory governance is either direct (when people
hold elected positions) or indirect when people vote those in power. For elections to be
inclusive all strata of populations must be involved in the electoral phases and the system in
place must ensure all measures are put in place (assistive technologies, transportation means
etc.) to facilitate the involvement of every eligible voter (irrespective of geography, ability or
disorders - hearing, visual, cognitive/language, physical, seizure and multiple impairments;
aged, mobile personnel as soldiers etc.) to partake in the electoral process."7
Exclusion of PWDs from electoral process manifest in various forms, ranging from;
little or no consultation in the development of electoral laws, policies and regulations,
and their inadequate to access and participate in the election
exclusion from participating in the administration of EMBs (Election Monitoring
Board), exclusion from the processes of designing and planning of election logistics
including voting materials, voting venues, etc;
6 Adapted from: www.indiana.edu/~nca/leisureed/inclusion2.html
7International Disability Alliance contribution to OHCHR Thematic Study on "The participation of persons with
disabilities in political and public life" www.openideo.com/challenge/voting/inspiration/democracy-
participatory-governance-inclusive-elections.
pg. 18
little or no involvement in the training of election officials
little or no access to election and political media information
inaccessible ballot papers and voting machines, voting centres, etc;
Exclusion from election monitoring activities.
1.4 Stakeholders in the Conduct of Inclusive and Accessible Electoral Process
Virtually every actor in the political and democratic space has roles to play in ensuring that
the process is as inclusive and accessible as possible. In conducting this advocacy, DPAI and
LACSOP identified and reviewed the roles of some state and non-state actors.
1.4.1 Political Parties
As effective instrument of political mobilization, interest aggregation and articulation as well
as indispensable channel of ascending political power, political parties must demonstrate
interest and advance policies that reflect the conglomerate of interest (including those of the
marginalized groups) in society.
Political parties in Nigeria have paid limited attention to the imperative of enunciating
constitutional provision on the rights and privileges of the marginalized groups and strategic
Picture 1: A persons with visual impairment standing behind electoral officers to observe
proceeding at a polling unit.
pg. 19
policies and programmes in their manifestos. Besides this documentary policy initiative,
political parties have also substantially failed to develop pragmatic strategy on the
mainstreaming of PWDs in the structures and processes.
Such strategy must include creation of Disability Desks in Party Secretariats/offices, ensure
accessibility to the offices, include representation of PWDs in the decision-making organs
and grant special waivers for aspiring PWDs on becoming candidates of the party. Other
measures needed are strategy for recruitment and retention of PWD members and a data base
of members for easy and prompt mobilization. Political Parties are also expected to ensure
their internal and external communication are conducted in easily readable formats e.g., use
of simple languages, Braille or tactile and sign language interpretation. These inadequacies
have limited the ability of PWDs to participate effectively in political parties‘ activities and
thereby deprive them the electoral opportunities it bestows.
1.4.2 Civil Society Organizations CSOs
CSOs, particularly those working in the field of disabilities have in no small measure
influenced the 2015 elections. Many of such organisations at different locations have
engaged in advocacy for more inclusion of persons with disabilities in the electoral process.
For instance, Disability Policy and Advocacy Initiative (DPAI) in collaboration with the
Lagos State Civil Society Partnership (LACSOP) and with the support of the DFID State
Accountability & Voice Initiative (SAVI) developed the checklist for monitoring elections to
ensure inclusiveness. This Monitoring Checklist was translated to the umbrella body of
Disability CSOs in Nigeria - Joint National Association of Persons with Disabilities
[JONAPWD] for adoption and ownership.
JONAPWD used the Checklist to engage INEC at the national level, while DPAI engaged
INEC at the Lagos State and South-West level. The outcome of these engagements is that the
awareness and sensitivity INEC had towards the participation of persons with disabilities was
heightened in the build up of the 2015 elections. Accordingly INEC took specific steps to
promote the inclusion of persons with disabilities in the elections.
From the state of voter education through the conduct of the elections and announcement of
result, different disability organisations worked collaboratively to make the 2015 election
inclusive. It is on record that Disability Organisations such as DPAI published and circulated
IEC materials encouraging persons with disabilities to get involved in the electoral process,
while calling on the general public to assist persons with disabilities to participate in the
elections. All these are in accordance with INEC priority voting policy. Association of sign
Language Interpreters of Nigeria on their own part worked in collaboration with INEC to
create inclusion and access for the deaf at various voters and civic engagement forum and to
get the elections results interpreted in sign Language. Transition Monitoring Group (TMG)
was also handy to facilitate election monitoring by persons with disabilities and their
organisations.
On the whole, there was a considerable improvement in the activities of CSOs in fostering the
inclusion of persons with disabilities in the electoral process in this present dispensation.
pg. 20
1.4.3 Police/Security
The main role of security agencies during an Election is to maintain order and to create by
means of effective policing, a favourable climate in which a democratic election can take
place.
The Nigeria police in carrying out this role, between 1999-2015, have lacked adequate
capacity to effectively address the regular incidences of violence during electoral process.
What was predominantly the norm can be described as the heavy presence of security
operatives across the polling units in the country, with several artificial road blocks mounted
by heavily armed men and women of the military forces days prior to election days, curfew
or restriction of movements in place in most cases. Security officials are mostly stern looking,
and their rifles in their arms seeming ready to fire.
These unapproachable demeanour will intimidate even the best intending civilian and against
the terms of inclusion which states ―An individual with disability having a sense of fulfilment
and the opportunity to be successful within a given environment.‖ These militarized political
atmosphere impacts negatively on many people especially people with disabilities and other
vulnerable groups. Being self-conscious of their disability and vulnerability, and as a safety
measure, they often stay away from the election, at the heavy cost of not casting their votes,
exercising their franchise and fundamental human right. This was evidenced in the Ekiti and
Osun 2014 gubernatorial elections.
The security agencies can be more effective and consciously inclusive in its duties during
elections and other elections related activities within the context of National Security that has
a high premium for democratic Policing and with due regards to its core values. Towards
future elections starting from 2015, the Civil Society especially stakeholders in inclusive
elections privy to democratic policing advocated for inclusive electoral process among all
stakeholders including the security agencies.
Democratic Policing is a philosophy to guide police management styles, policies, strategies
and operational performance. It is practiced within the following key principles:
Relies upon active partnership between the citizens (community) and the Police;
Ensure that the Security Agencies view their primary role as the provision of quality
service to the community;
Entails that the police adopt a problem solving approach to their work;
Requires that the Police and the National Security and Civil Defence involve the
community in the determination of policing priorities
Having this in mind, democratic policing therefore embraces the following values
(i) Respect for and protection of human rights
(ii) Transparency and openness in relation to activities and relationship within and
outside the security organizations
(iii) Demonstrable commitment at all times to deliver the best possible service
(iv)Willingness to seek, listen to and act upon public opinion relating to policing
priorities
pg. 21
1.4.4 MEDIA
The media, particularly electronic media, play a crucial role in shaping voter interest in, and
attitudes about inclusive election. The way the media portray persons with disability, how
they deal with issues of special concern to PWDs and whether they convey effectual voter
education messages can have a major impact on PWDs participation in an election.
In general, election laws and media laws create a framework for the role of the media in
elections. In reality, however, media regulations and practices may indirectly disadvantage
PWDs when issues that affect them are not understood.
1.4.5. National and State Legislatures
The National and State legislatures have the sole responsibilities to make laws; appropriate
funds and resources as well as conduct oversight over the activities of the executive arm and
all agencies of government including the election management bodies.
As earlier noted, the National Assembly has not fared well enough in its responsibilities to
ensure that the 1999 Constitution and the Electoral Act adequately mainstream and provide
for the needs of PWDs. In fact, it is safe to assume that the National Assembly is generally
less sensitive towards issues of inclusion and disability as far as the electoral process is
concerned.
At the state level, most State Houses of assembly have also done virtually nothing to promote
inclusion in the laws establishing their State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIECs).
However, few states including Lagos and Ekiti have enacted Disability Laws which generally
promote the inclusion of PWDs in the political and electoral processes.
1.4.6 International Development Agencies
These agencies have provided huge support to relevant governmental and nongovernmental
institutions working on the electoral process. The development agencies often enter into
partnership with the election management bodies especially the Independent National
Electoral Commission (INEC) by providing funding and capacity-building.
While these agencies have over the years made efforts to promote inclusion of PWDs, their
interventions have basically focused on supporting CSO advocacies; with very little attention
towards the institutional development and capacity-building of INEC, political parties, the
media, etc. Thus far, no attention and support have been given towards development of
Disability Data Base (DDB) for the electoral process; an aspect which has been identified to
be very critical to all on-going efforts to promote inclusive electoral process. Even where
support is given, development agencies do little to monitor compliance.
1.4.7. Election Management Bodies EMBs
In the Nigerian context, INEC and the SIECs are at the forefront of managing elections at the
national and state levels respectively. Since independence, EMBs in Nigeria generally lack
awareness, as well as the institutional and human capacities to ensure effective inclusion and
access of PWDs in all aspects of the electoral process.
pg. 22
Since the second republic of 1979 up to the pre-AtahiruJega
years of INEC in the current democratic dispensation, no EMB
in Nigeria is noted to have strategically and constructively
engaged PWDs, DPOs and other interested stakeholders on
issues of inclusive and accessible electoral process. For
instance, prior to the DPAI & LACSOP-lead advocacy and
partnership with INEC, no EMB in Nigeria have ever produced
voter and civic education materials including media jingles in
accessible formats for PWDs.
This long years of poor institutional and human capacity on the
part of previous and present EMBs, have been the major
reasons for the persistent exclusion of PWDs from effectively
participating in the electoral process.
1.5 Advocacy for Inclusive and Accessible 2015 General
Elections
The Lagos State Civil Society Partnership (LACSOP), the
umbrella body for all network of CSOs in Lagos State in
partnership with Disability Policy and Advocacy Initiative
(DPAI) with support from DFID‘s State Accountability and
Voice Initiative (SAVI),IRI and NHRC considered it apt and
timely to make a strategic intervention to conduct an advocacy
with critical stakeholders especially the Independent National
Electoral Commission (INEC) on possibilities of ensuring
increased and improved participation of PWDs in the 2015
general elections
The LACSOP/DPAI lead advocacy was initiated with a desk
review and the development of a Monitoring Checklist in
Lagos. The draft report and the checklist were presented for
stakeholders‘ validation at zonal level in Ibadan at the
southwest, and at the national level in Abuja. DPOs, CSOs,
INEC, political parties, the media and international
development partners actively participated at the validation
meetings.
LACSOP and DPAI equally demonstrated the possibility of
producing inclusive and accessible media jingles as well as
civic and voter education materials in Lagos. Here are links to
some of the Inclusive voter and civic education media Jingles:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W23_63Ouyf88
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTnXprT6hqk9
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10HySAI4jSw10
8 Civic and Voter Education Media Jingle produced by DPAI & LACSOP in collaboration with INEC and
Media Partners in November, 2014. 9 Ibid.
10 Ibid.
Picture 2 A sample of the IEC material on priority voting.
Picture 3: A cross section of CSO members at an engagement with INEC.
pg. 23
The key outcome of these engagements included:
Adoption of the monitoring checklist by INEC: At the presentation of the Monitoring
checklist to INEC in its Abuja head quarters on July 22nd
2014. The Chairman pledged
that INEC will adopt the checklist for use during the 2015 general elections.
Conduct of National Conference on Inclusion and Participation of PWDs in the 2015
General Elections: In December, 2014, INEC organized a National Conference to
gather expert views on how to effectively include PWDs in the general elections. At
the Conference, INEC pledged to use knowledge and information obtained to develop
an inclusive electoral policy.
Collaboration between DPAI, LACSOP, INEC and a cross section of media
organizations to produce inclusive and accessible voter and civic education materials:
For the first time in Nigeria, inclusive and accessible formats of voter and civic
education and communications materials in Braille and large print, including sign
interpreted audiovisual media jingles were produced. This was a demonstration
activity with support from the Lagos office of DFID-SAVI intended to encourage
INEC towards taking similar actions. The media organizations aired the media jingles
for several weeks before the elections free of charge.
Invitation of PWDs to various Stakeholders Consultative Meetings: At both national
and state levels, INEC ensured that PWDs were invited to its various stakeholders'
consultative meetings. At these meetings, all INEC‘s civic and voter education
materials were produced in accessible formats while sign interpreters were provided
for the deaf. Most of the events were held in accessible venues for wheelchair users.
INEC Partnered with LACSOP and DPAI to Produce Posters on Priority Voting: In
Lagos State, INEC financially sponsored the production of public enlightenment
posters on priority voting which was produced by LACSOP and DPAI
pg. 24
CHAPTER 2
INTERNATIONAL, REGIONAL, NATIONAL AND STATE LAWS /
POLICIES ON INCLUSIVE ELECTIONS
2.0 Introduction
Despite its importance, the electoral process in Nigeria is still one in which persons with
disabilities suffer exclusion and denial of access to equal participation, albeit tacitly. Though
international instruments such as the CRPD provide for full political participation of PWDs,
the implementation of such provisions would be as specifically stipulated by local
legislations. Unfortunately, successive electoral laws that have been operated ever since the
democratic history of Nigeria have not really been inclusive of PWDs. That is to say that the
electoral laws of Nigeria have been oblivious of the need for the full and equal participation
of Persons with disabilities in the electoral process. Specifically, there are no legal provisions
for the effective participation of persons with disabilities at the different stages of the
electoral process namely, voter registration, voter education, accreditation, collation, result
announcement etc. The mention of disability issues in the successive electoral laws in Nigeria
has always only been in terms of the visually impaired persons been allowed to be assisted to
vote by a third party. This obviously compromises the secrecy and security of the vote of the
affected person. In other words, there is no guarantee that the vote of the visually impaired
voter in question will actually be cast for the candidate of his choice. Even when such votes
are actually cast according to the instruction of the said visually impaired person, the element
of secrecy will be absent.
Government at the various levels as well as the successive election management bodies
treated the participation of persons with disabilities in the electoral process rather as a non-
issue. However, as a result of effective advocacy by disability rights activist and disability
organizations with the support of development partners such as the State Accountability and
Voice Initiative (SAVI) of the DFID, the 2015 general election has become a remarkable
improvement in the inclusion and participation of persons with disabilities on all fronts.
In this chapter, we review provisions of relevant electoral legal and policy frameworks and
considerations with a view to identifying their strengths and weaknesses in ensuring inclusive
and accessible electoral process for PWDs in Nigeria. Due to time, availability and
accessibility of records, we are able to review the Electoral Decree of 1977, Electoral Acts of
1982, 2001, 2002, 2006 and 2010 as amended respectively. The INEC Strategic Plan of 2012
to 2016 is also reviewed to ascertain the level of policy commitment to the inclusion of
PWDs in the electoral process in line with global best practices and the spirit of national
integration as espoused by the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
2.1 Electoral Laws and Experiences in Inclusive Elections: 1977 to 2010
Besides the Constitution, Electoral laws have been the major legal framework for the conduct
of all elections in Nigeria. Specific provisions are made for the composition and conduct of
the election management body, political parties and other stakeholders. Also, the conducts
and participation of citizens, provision of electoral materials and infrastructure, among others
pg. 25
are also provided. For this purpose, we examine some electoral laws which have been
implemented since the 1979 second republic to date.
Section 50 of the electoral Decree, 1977 provides as follows:
“A voter who is blind or is otherwise unable to distinguish
symbols or who suffers any other physical disability may be
accompanied into the polling station by a friend or relative
chosen by him and the friend or relative shall after informing
the presiding officer of the disability be permitted to
accompany the voter into the voting compartment and assist
the voter to make his left thumb mark, on the left side of the
symbol nominated by the voter, to insert the ballot paper in
the envelope and to seal the envelope.”
This was repealed by the Electoral Act of 1982 which repeated the same provision in section
52.
Section 51 of the Electoral Act of 2001 repeated the said provision only with a minor
modification as follows:
“A voter who is blind or is otherwise unable to distinguish
symbols or who suffers any other physical disability may be
accompanied into the polling station by a person chosen by
him and the person shall after informing the Presiding
Officer of the disability, be permitted to accompany the voter
into the voting compartment and assist the voter to make his
mark in accordance with the procedure prescribed by the
Commission.”
This provision was repeated verbatim as section 47 of the Electoral Act, 2002; and section 57
of the Electoral Act 2006. Presently section 56 of the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended)
retains the said provision with only a minute modification as follows:
“A voter who is blind or is otherwise unable to distinguish
symbols or who suffers any other physical disability may be
accompanied into the polling unit by a person chosen by him
and the person shall after informing the Presiding Officer of
the disability, be permitted to accompany the voter into the
voting compartment and assist the voter to make his mark in
accordance with the procedure prescribed by the
Commission.”
Other provisions of the Electoral Act 2010 as amended that could also be of relevance to
effective inclusion and accessibility for PWDs are as follows:
Section 42: The Commission shall establish sufficient number of polling units in each
registration area and shall allot voters to such polling unit.
NOTE: It is important that these polling units be made accessible to PWDs.
pg. 26
Section 43: The Commission shall provide suitable boxes for the conduct of election.
NOTE: The ballot boxes should have brailed inscription to guide the blind.
Section 44: The Commission shall prescribe the format of the ballot papers which shall
include the symbol adopted by the political party of the candidate and such
other information as it may require.
NOTE: Brailed ballot papers would assist the blind to vote independently.
Section 51: Provides that: The Presiding Officer shall separate the queue between men
and women if in that area of the country the culture is such that it does not
permit mingling of men and woman in the same queue.
NOTE: For the purpose of convenience, similar separate queue may be made of PWDs so
that they can be more easily attended to.
Section 56 provides as follows:
“A voter who is blind or is otherwise unable to distinguish
symbols or who suffers any other physical disability may be
accompanied into the polling unit by a person chosen by him
and the person shall after informing the Presiding Officer of
the disability, be permitted to accompany the voter into the
voting compartment and assist the voter to make his mark in
accordance with the procedure prescribed by the
Commission.”
NOTE: Much as this is good, efforts should be made toward a situation where the blind and
other PWDs can be totally independent while voting. Situation where they need to be
accompanied in another to cast their votes makes them susceptible to exploitation.
Nonetheless, within the period 1999 to date, series of elections did hold with marginal
participation of PWDs. Basically, as noted earlier, the provision made for them was limited
to vote casting that was devoid of secrecy and independence. This negates the spirit of
democracy wherein the people are to exercise their franchise in secret without a third party
intervention.
2.2 INEC Strategic Programme of Action 2012-2016
The following objectives, activities and indicators in the INEC Strategic Programme of
Action are considerations upon which the 2014 to 2015 citizens‘ advocacies for inclusive
elections were based:
Objective One: To provide electoral operations, systems and infrastructure to
support delivery of free, fair and credible elections
pg. 27
1.1Objectives: Ensure a good constitutional and legal framework for the conduct of
free, fair and credible elections
Activities: Policies to allow Out of Country Voting (OCV) and voting by marginalized
groups
Indicators: Proposed areas of Constitutional and Electoral Act amendments completed by
Q2 2013.
1.7 Objectives: To provide infrastructure to support delivery of free, fair and credible
elections
Activities: Provision of voting cubicles and infrastructures at all Polling Units for
physically challenged person
Indicators: Contract awarded & completed by Q2 2014
Objective Two: To improve voter education, training and research
2.2 Objectives Formulate and Implement Training Programmes
Activities: Review of election manuals to accommodate persons with disabilities
Indicators: Approval secured by Q1each and training conducted by Feb. 2013, 2014
2.5 Objectives Formulate and implement policies to ensure participation of
marginalized groups including persons with disability as well as Out of
Country Voting (OCV)
Activities: Enhance the participation of Persons Living with Disabilities (PLWD) as well
as Out of Country Voting (OCV) on the electoral process
Indicators: Approval secured for conduct of zonal workshops by Q2 2013, 2014 & Q1
2015
As we shall observe in subsequent chapters, most of these objectives, activities and indicators
were not achieved before and during the conduct of the 2015 general elections. This therefore
hindered the inclusion and participation of PWDs in the electoral process.
2.3 Provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria for the
Conduct of Inclusive and Accessible Electoral Process
Chapter II of the 1999 Nigeria Constitution: Fundamental Objectives and Directive
Principles of State Policy
Section 13. It shall be the duty and responsibility of all organs of government, and of all
authorities and persons, exercising legislative, executive or judicial powers, to
conform to, observe and apply the provisions of this Chapter of this
Constitution.
pg. 28
Section 14. (1) The Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be a State based on the
Principles of democracy and social justice.
(2) It is hereby, accordingly, declared that:
(c) The participation by the people in their government shall be
ensured in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.
Section 17. (1) The State social order is founded on ideals of freedom, equality and
Justice.
(2) In furtherance of the social order-
(a) Every citizen shall have equality of rights, obligations and
opportunities before the law;
The combined effect of the above sections of the Constitution directs all organs of
government in Nigeria to ensure that all citizens participate in their government according to
the provisions of the constitution.
Chapter IV of the 1999 Constitution: Fundamental Rights
Section 42 (1) A citizen of Nigeria of a particular community, ethnic group,
place of origin, sex, religion or political opinion shall not, by
reason only that he is such a person:-
(a) be subjected either expressly by, or in the practical
application of, any law in force in Nigeria or any executive
or administrative action of the government, to disabilities
or restrictions to which citizens of Nigeria of other
communities, ethnic groups, places of origin, sex, religious
or political opinions are not made subject; or
(b) be accorded either expressly by, or in the practical
application of, any law in force in Nigeria or any such
executive or administrative action, any privilege or
advantage that is not accorded to citizens of Nigeria of
other communities, ethnic groups, places of origin, sex,
religious or political opinions.
(2) No citizen of Nigeria shall be subjected to any disability, restriction
or deprivation merely by reason of the circumstances of his birth.
Section IV of the 1999 Constitution protects the rights of all citizens from any
disability or deprivation by reason of circumstances of birth.
Chapter VI of the 1999 Constitution: Political Parties
Section 222 No association by whatever name called shall function as a party, unless -
(b) The membership of the association is open to every citizen of Nigeria
irrespective of his place of origin, circumstance of birth, sex, religion
or ethnic grouping;
There should be no barriers from registering as a member of a political party in Nigeria.
pg. 29
These constitutional provisions notwithstanding, the rights of PWDs to effectively participate
in the electoral process have been generally eroded by successive election management
bodies, political parties and other stakeholders in the electoral process.
2.4 Contributions of State Disability Laws to the Conduct of Inclusive and
Accessible Electoral Process in Nigeria
The 1999 Constitution as amended provides for the establishment of State Independent
Electoral Commissions (SIECs) to conduct local government elections. The SIECs, in
conjunction with INEC make all necessary administrative and logistic provisions for the
conduct of local government elections.
The provisions of the 1999 Constitution as amended, the 2010 Electoral Act as amended and
other relevant international and local statutes notwithstanding, it is expected that state-level
disability laws make relevant provisions to guarantee the inclusion and participation of PWDs
in political and electoral activities in the state. For this purpose therefore, we review the Ekiti
and Lagos state disability laws.
2.4.1 Ekiti State Rights of Persons with Disabilities Law 2013
Section 18; Right to Political Participation
(1) The State Independent Electoral Commission shall ensure that all
polling stations are accessible to persons with disabilities and that all
materials related to the electoral process are easily understandable by
and accessible to persons with disabilities.
(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the provisions contained in sub–
section (1), the measures undertaken by an Electoral Commission in
pursuance of that sub–section shall include:
a). the construction and availability of ramps at all polling
Booths
b). Separate queues for persons with disabilities at all polling
booths with clear pictorial signs;
c). The availability of ballot papers and/or electronic voting
machines with candidates’ information available in Braille
and other accessible formats;
d). the fitting of audio devices to electronic voting machines;
e). Training programs to sensitize polling officers about the
special requirements of persons with disabilities.
(3) If the Presiding Officer of a polling booth is satisfied that, due to
disability, a person with disability is unable to recognize the symbols
or to record vote without assistance, the presiding officer shall permit
the elector to take a companion of not less than eighteen years of age
to the voting compartment for recording/casting the vote.
2.4.2 Lagos State Special Peoples Law, 2011
pg. 30
Prohibition from Discrimination and Harmful Treatment. 21. (1) No person living with disability shall be discriminated against on the
ground of his or her disability by any person or institution in any manner or
circumstances whatsoever.
Right to Freedom.
30. (1) Persons living with disability shall have freedom of expression and opinion,
Including the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas
through any means of communication of their choice.
(2) Government, Corporate organization and persons shall:
(a) provide information intended for the general public to persons living
with disability in accessible formats and technologies appropriate to
the different kinds of disabilities timely and at no additional cost;
(b) Accept and facilitate the use of sign languages, Braille, augmentative
and alternative communication in all interactions.
In spite of the provisions made by these state disability laws, there are no evidences to show
that the conduct of local government elections in these states have made adequate provisions
for the inclusion of PWDs.
2.5 Contributions of International Statutes to the Conduct of Inclusive and
Accessible Electoral Process in Nigeria
Nigeria is signatory to several international statutes and a few of them have been
domesticated through acts of the Nigerian Legislature as required by Section 12 of the 1999
Constitution as amended. Some of these statutes provide for the respect of rights of PWDs as
well as their inclusion and participation in all spheres of life in Nigeria. For this purpose, we
review the African Charter on Human and Peoples Right (ACHPR) and the United Nations
Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) respectively.
2.5.1 The African Charter on Human and Peoples Right (ACHPR)
Article 18(4) of ACHPR provides that:
“The aged and disabled shall also have the right to special
measure of protection in keeping with their physical or moral
need.”
Article 13 of the ACHPR provides as follows:
“Every citizen shall have the right to participate freely in the
government of his country, either directly or through freely
chosen representatives in accordance with the provisions of
the law.”
The African Charter has been domesticated in Nigeria by an Act of the National Assembly.
Therefore the above provision can be invoked to cater for the aged and persons with
pg. 31
disability at elections. Accordingly, the INEC priority voting policy is in perfect alignment
with this provision of the Law.
2.5.2 United Nations Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD)
The UNCRPD was adopted on 13 December 2006 during the sixty-first session of the
General Assembly by resolution A/RES/61/106.
Nigeria joined a number of countries in declaring support for disability rights on Friday, 24th
September 2010, signing both the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(CRPD) and its Optional Protocol. Nigeria became the 94th
country to ratify the Convention
and 58th
to ratify the Optional Protocol.
The CRPD is the first international, legally binding human rights treaty targeted at
comprehensively protecting the human rights of people with disabilities. Article 29 of this
Convention generally provides for ―Participation in political and public life.‖ Specifically, it
enjoins ―State Parties‖ to guarantee to persons with disabilities political rights and the
opportunity to enjoy them on an equal basis with others. Furthermore, the article demands
that State parties shall undertake ensuring that voting procedures, facilities and materials are
appropriate, accessible and easy to understand and use.
Right to vote in the CRPD
ISG Top Voter, a machine designed specifically to be used by voters with disabilities.
11
Some democracies, e.g., the US, Japan, Netherlands, Slovenia, Albania and India12
make the
necessary reasonable accommodation allowing persons with disability to cast their votes
independently using electronic voting machines and other aides which help disabled voters to
fill the paper ballot. In some others countries such as Azerbaijan, Kosovo, Canada, Ghana,
United Kingdom, and most of African and Asian countries,13
visually impaired voters can use
ballots in Braille or paper ballot templates.
Many of these and also some other democracies, Chile14
for example, use adjustable desks so
that voters on wheelchairs can approach them. Some democracies only allow another person
11
Source: www.elections.ca 12
Ibid. 13
Ibid. 14
Ibid.
pg. 32
to cast a ballot for the blind or disabled voter. Such arrangement, however, does not assure
independence or secrecy of the ballot.
In some democracies, i.e. Sweden and the US,15
all the polling places already are fully
accessible for disabled voters.
Generally speaking, a country ratifying treaty is an indication of her approval of its
provisions. This may necessitate the country modifying some of her existing laws to bring
them in conformity with the ratified treaty.
However, in Nigeria, by virtue of section 12 of 1999 Constitution, an international
Convention like the UNCRPD, would need to be domesticated by an act of the National
Assembly before it can assume the force of Law in Nigeria. The domestication of the
UNCRPD has not been done in Nigeria, and to that extent, the effect of the Convention in
Nigeria is at best merely persuasive, and not binding.
2.6 Summary
From the above appraisal of local and international statues viz-a-viz the issues of inclusive
and accessible electoral process for PWDs in Nigeria, we observe that the key challenge is
not substantially in the inadequacy of legal and policy frame works. Rather, it is more with
the poor enforcement of, and/or compliance with existing laws.
We acknowledge that the 1999 Constitution as amended, the 2010 Electoral Act as amended
and other relevant national and sub-national legal and policy frameworks require urgent and
necessary amendments to meet with international standards and best practice in the conduct
of inclusive and accessible electoral process. Nonetheless, PWDs and other advocacy groups
should begin their advocacies by holding government, election management bodies, political
parties and other responsible agencies accountable for the full implementation of, and
compliance with existing laws.
15
Ibid.
pg. 33
Chapter 3
DESCRIPTIVE NARRATIVES OF ACTIVITIES BEFORE, DURING
AND AFTER THE 2015 GENERAL ELECTIONS
3.0 Introduction
World over, democracy is considered the best and most progressive form of government.
Nigeria began a stable and ever growing democratic journey in 1999 after the first, second
and third republics were truncated. However, since the restoration of democracy, the
challenge of ensuring inclusion and access of all citizens in the political and electoral
processes irrespective of their social, ethnic, economic, gender and disability status has
remained seemingly irresolvable
As the 2015 general elections approached, civil society
groups, especially disabled people‘s organizations and
international development agencies in Nigeria stepped-
up advocacies to ensure substantial inclusion and
access for persons with disabilities, women, the
elderly and other excluded groups in the political and
electoral processes. With the support of the State
Accountability and Voice Initiative (SAVI) of the
DFID in Lagos, LACSOP and DPAI set up the CSO
2015 General Elections Situation Room to monitor
and observe the activities before, during and after the
elections.
This chapter describes, in narrative terms, the observed
happenings at the 2015 elections at the federal and
state levels. Realizing that elections are not just about
the happenings on election days, it considers what
transpired, pre, during and post voting process and the
part played by different stakeholders.
3.1 Pre-election
It is common knowledge that voting for the right people is the first step in the journey of a
thousand miles that will lead to the Promised Land of good and inclusive governance. To get
the desired votes, political parties engage in campaigns. Having witnessed many elections,
the 2015 election campaigns remains the most passionate, so far, dividing many friends and
in some cases relatives along party, ethnic and religious lines. The campaigns witnessed the
involvement of women, youths and Persons with Disabilities (PWDs).
The bar of campaigns was raised as political parties went to every nook and cranny,
employing many strategies to woo electorates. The usual political debates by candidates took
place though some candidates declined.
More Nigerians became more politically conscious and active unlike the previous sheer
apathy. Engaging in political discussions in busses, on queues, at newspapers vendors‘
Picture 1: Dwarfs celebrating with a candidate at a political rally in Lagos.
Picture 2: CSO members presenting IEC on voter’s registration in Lagos, Nigeria
pg. 34
stands, canteens etc became very common. Most Nigerian youths became hyperactive on the
social media space which provided an inexpensive platform of sharing political opinions.
Admittedly, many used uncouth language and insults at the slightest provocation, albeit, they
played their part.
The Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) were not left out as many of them facilitated town
hall meetings which the political parties and INEC bought into. CSOs pushed for all-inclusive
manifestoes and deliverables in favour of women, youths and PWDs. For instance, in Lagos,
LACSOP organized and participated at several citizens consultative forum. LACSOP also
developed and presented a Citizens Charter to gubernatorial and State Assembly candidates
to elicit their commitment to people-oriented laws and policies should they emerge as
winners. LACSOP also conducted Mandate Protection Campaigns among the citizens;
distributing Mandate Protection leaflets (See Appendix C) across the state with a view to
enlighten them on the need to protect their votes, hold elected leaders accountable to their
campaign promises and identify the roles and responsibilities of key stakeholders in the
electoral process.
At the heart of the CSO-lead advocacies before the elections was the need to ensure inclusion
and access for PWDs. LACSOP collaborated with DPAI in Lagos state to conduct several
engagements with INEC, political parties, the media and other stakeholders in this respect.
These efforts stimulated more responsiveness on the part of INEC which ensured that access
of PWDs to electoral information such as civic and voter education and media materials were
reasonably enhanced. As political party campaigns heightened, for the first time ever in the
political history of Nigeria, parties ensured that they had sign language interpreters at most of
their campaign rallies across the states while INEC public announcements carried on
television were interpreted by sign language experts.16
However, in many cases, the campaign was more of unabashed calumny with the tactic of
embarrassing mudslinging of candidates and supporters. The social media became a battle
ground where ethnic and religious motivated hatred and threats of violence were spewed.
People cared less about ‗civility‘ as information of yester years were bandied about like
gospel, defaming one another without a care about the offences of slander and libel. This
increased all manner of apprehension from scuttling the exercise to outright war. In fact some
predicted the end of the entity called Nigeria!
There was disgraceful crumbs distribution in form of money, telephone handsets and food
stuffs, leaving much blame on the desk of INEC due to its inability to regulate political
campaign finances.
INEC is created by the constitution and empowered by section 154 of the Electoral Act to
conduct civic education and enlightenment in the print and electronic media to enhance its
functions. One of the functions according to section 2 is promoting knowledge of sound
democratic election processes. INEC‘s part in pre-election matters like qualification for
registration and acceptable campaign standards left much to be desired. For instance contrary
to section 95(1) of the Electoral Act prohibiting tainted, abusive, intemperate, slanderous
political campaign or slogan likely to injure religious, ethnic, tribal or sectional feelings.
Many candidates were not only labelled by their ethnicity and religion but caricatured,
provoking negative reactions from their supporters. Again, in direct contravention of
Subsection (3) Places designated for religious worship, and public office were used for 16
IRI report p.5
pg. 35
political campaigns, rallies, processions, promotion and shredding of political parties,
candidates, and their programs. In the face of subsections (5) and (6), our media was
inundated with news of burnings and killings of members and properties of the opposition,
acts perpetuated by loyalist groups who many times possessed arms. Despite the commission
of these offences, nobody was seen to be prosecuted not to talk of paying the penalty of N1,
000,000.00 or imprisonment for the term or 12 months; and (b) in the case of a political party,
to a fine or N2, 000,000.00 in the first instance, and N1, 000,000.00 for any subsequent
offence as provided under the Law. Section 130, penalize giving or accepting of money or
any other inducement for voting or refraining from voting after the date of an election has
been announced with the fine of N100.000.00 or imprisonment for a term of 12 months or
both. Every form of inducement was distributed at campaign rallies. Even those who voted
the other way despite the inducements could be guilty of ‗receiving…‘
Some have excused INEC for overlooking some of its functions because it grappled with the
task of distributing the Permanent Voters Card (PVC) to majority of registered voters.
Unfortunately, some Nigerians were disenfranchised by inability to collect PVCs.
The security agents tried to quell tension but it did not stop, residents of different tribes
fleeing home in droves especially wives and children due to apprehension of electoral
violence.
The media did its best in informing Nigerians of the happenings though some of them did not
only exhibit party preference but descended into the arena of politics in terms of reportage
and coverage.
3.2 During Election
3.2.1 Presidential and National Assembly Elections
The presidential and National Assembly elections held on the 28th
of March, 2015, and their
aftermath have increased Nigeria‘s stature around the globe. The presidential position had 14
contestants with only one being female, though the vice president‘s position had four
females.17
None of the candidates was a PWD but National Conscience Party (NCP) had a
PWD contest for senatorial position in Delta state.18
The presidential election had a massive
turnout of Nigerians who stood under the rain and scorching sun across the country to vote
for their preferred candidates. It is worthy of mention that all the presidential candidates got
votes in all the states.19
17 final list of presidential and national assembly candidates for 2015 general elections available @
http://www.inecnigeria.org/?page_id=3508 accessed 6th
May 2015 President Goodluck Jonathan (PDP),
General Muhammad Buhari (APC), Prof. Comfort Oluremi Sonaiya (Kowa), Ambrose Albert (HDP), Ganiyu
Galadima (ACPN), Rafiu Salau(AD), Dr.Nani Ibrahim Ahmad (ADC), Martin Onovo (NCP), Tunde
Anifowoshe-Kelani (AA), Chekwas Okorie (UPP), Ayeni Musa Adebayo (APA), Sam Eke (CPP), Allagoa Kelvin
Chinedu (PPN), Godson Mgbodile Ohaenyem (UDP). 18
IRI report p.5
19 2015 Presidential election result available @ http://www.inecnigeria.org/?inecnews=2015-presidential-
election-result-2 accessed 6th
May 2015.
pg. 36
Observed media reports across the country indicated the participation of PWDs, women
(including pregnant women) and the elderly who defied all their accessibility challenges to
participate in the voting exercise.
3.2.2 Gubernatorial and State Assembly Elections
Nigeria‘s 36 governors have considerable sway being chief executive officers in their
different states. The governorship elections held in
29 out of the 36 states on April 11th
2015. Elections
were not held in 7 states20
though the House of
Assembly elections were conducted in all the 36
states. There were 760 contestants with only 24
female gubernatorial candidates and 63 deputy
gubernatorial candidates. None of the gubernatorial
candidates was a PWD but PDP had two PWD
candidates for state assembly elections in Plateau
and Jigawa.21
It was observed that turnout of voters
during gubernatorial elections was lower than the
presidential.
During the presidential and gubernatorial elections,
it was observed that PWDs, elderly and pregnant
women experienced priority voting in many polling
units. Women, youths and PWDs participated as
party agents, for instance some political parties presented PWDs for training as party agents
in Adamawa and OndoStates. Again women, youth and disability groups like JONAPWD
and Disability policy and Advocacy initiative (DPAI) were accredited by INEC as domestic
observers during the polls.
In places like Lagos, generally, electorates comported themselves though in a particular
polling unit, a political party distributed alcohol causing commotion. There was also
incidence of ballot boxes snatching questioning the performance by security agents.22
This
questions the claims of INEC and CSOs engaging political parties on proper act as contained
in the Electoral Act.
It is worthy of note that in Lagos, security agents were generally civil.
Access of PWDs to information was not guaranteed as election materials were designed in
simple language for all category of voters but not Braille or tactile format for blind voters.
Use of sign language for the benefit of deaf was not used.23
Again, INEC failed in its commitment of situating polling units in accessible locations away
from obstacles and provisions of ramps. Polling units were used for the polls irrespective of
the condition of their location. In accordance with the Electoral Act, PWDs in need of
assistance during the voting exercise were allowed to bring along persons of their choice,
while some were assisted by other voters and INEC staff. In Lafia, Nassarawa and Minna,
20
Bayelsa, Edo, Kogi, Anambra, Ondo, Osun and Ekiti states 21
IRI report p.5 22
Lagos election observation findings 23
IRI report p.5
Picture a pwd casting his vote in a transparent ballot box
pg. 37
Niger, ballots papers and boxes were placed on the ground to enable PWDs to thumb-print
and cast their votes. In Niger, there were no obstacles in the paths leading up to the polling
units and booths, but in Kogi, Kaduna, Nasarawa and Lagos some polling units had
obstacles hindering PWD access.24
INEC officials were generally punctual though some came late. However, in some parts of
Lagos, they allowed people vote without accreditation, i.e. on self recognition. Card reader
many times malfunctioned. Political parties in some places provided INEC staff with foods,
drinks and other logistics like chairs and tables which could possibly induce favourable
treatment. Many ballot papers were voided evidencing more civic education on proper
voting.25
3.3 Post Election
Most Nigerians remained in their polling units till election results were announced. The
palpable tension and uncertainty that the election occasioned right up to the collation centre
was reduced if not eliminated when the sitting president called, congratulated and conceded
defeat to the candidate of the opposition party. This almost dramatic novelty and gracious
gesture has changed the political geography of Nigeria in more ways than has been so far
computed. As several observers have noted, Nigerian democracy has stabilized further having
passed the test considered crucial by democratic theorists.26
3.4 Summary
Nigerians have spoken through their votes and the winners have all taken this moralistic,
patriotic, and high sounding oath of office -
„I, ............ do solemnly swear/affirm that I will be faithful and
bear true allegiance to the Federal Republic of Nigeria; …I
will discharge my duties to the best of my ability, faithfully
and in accordance with the Constitution of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria and the law, and always in the interest of
the sovereignty, integrity, solidarity, well-being and prosperity
of the Federal Republic of Nigeria; that I will strive to
preserve the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles
of State Policy contained in the Constitution of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria; that I will not allow my personal interest
to influence my official conduct or my official decisions; that
I will to the best of my ability preserve, protect and defend the
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria; that I will
abide by the Code of Conduct contained in the Fifth Schedule
to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria; that in
all circumstances, I will do right to all manner of people,
according to law, without fear or favour, affection or ill-will;
…; and that I will devote myself to the service and well-being
24
IRI report p.5,6 25
Lagos election observation findings 26
Buhari opportunity to change Nigeria’s narrative Punch April 3 2015 Ayo Olukotun
pg. 38
of the people of Nigeria. So help me God. (Underlining for
emphasis)
It is hoped that they will stick to the above oath by bearing true allegiance to Nigeria through
inclusive governance as well as sustaining the project ‗Nigeria‘ by unifying Nigerians. The
youths, women and PWDs could not be said to have enjoyed perfect Inclusiveness in the
2015 elections but for the PWDs it was a giant step in the right direction. Political ethics was
not at its best calling for improvement in 2019. However, our democracy is growing and it is
indeed a learning process.
pg. 39
CHAPTER 4
QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF OBSERVATIONS FROM THE 2015
GENERAL ELECTIONS
4.0 Introduction
This chapter is structured into 3 main sections. In the first section, the methods adopted in the
gathering and analyses of data as well as some issues with respect to the data gathering
instrument are discussed. In the second section, state-by-state analysis of data is presented
while the third section presents analysis of data based on zonal grouping of states in line with
the six geopolitical zones in Nigeria.
4.1 Methodology
4.1.1 Design:
The conduct of election observation is generally structured in line with the processes of
conducting survey studies. This is because data is collected by enumerators (Election
Observers) on the field from targeted human and institutional actors within a specific
geographical location before, during and after elections
Often times, election observation adopts one, two or more survey methods of data gathering
and analysis including population sampling, behaviour observation, administration of
questionnaire, the use of various tools of data analysis, etc.
The general objective of election observation just as in survey researches is to investigate,
identify, and analyze certain behavioural trends of a selected sample population with a view
to determining the level of its prevalence within a given population as well as the effects of
such behavioural trends on the larger population and the polity.
The observation of the 2015 general elections was therefore conducted as a survey study of
the general elections with a view to determining its level of inclusivity and accessibility to
marginalized electorates comprising of voters with disabilities, pregnant women and the
elderly voters.
4.1.2 Population:
The observation of the 2015 general elections focused on both human and institutional
population. The human population is constituted by all eligible and registered voters in
Nigeria while institutional population is constituted by the election management bodies,
political parties, security agencies, media organizations, federal and state governments
(comprising of the executive, legislature and the judiciary), and development agencies.
According to World Bank Estimates, Nigeria currently has a population of about 170 million
people.27
However, the records of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)
27
Source: www.worldpopulationreview.com/countries/nigeria-population/
pg. 40
puts the voting population at over 80 million people out of which over 50 million voters were
registered for the 2015 general elections.28
Again, using World Bank and WHO Disability Population Ratio of 10 to 15%,29
Nigeria has
about 25 million persons with disabilities and about 10 million of them are of voting age.
Currently, there is no official record of voters with disabilities.
INEC operates a national headquarters as well as offices in the 36 states, FCT Abuja and the
774 local government areas in Nigeria. Political parties and security agencies also replicate
similar organizational structure across the country, while CSOs, media organizations and
development agencies operate in specific locations considered to be of interest to them.
In 2015, INEC registered a total of 25 political parties which featured candidates in the
presidential, national assembly, gubernatorial and state assembly elections.
4.1.3 Sample Size and Sampling Method:
DPAI, LACSOP and its CSO partners observed the 2015 general elections in 10 states. These
states constitute the sample size for the purpose of this report.
The determination and selection of states, local government areas, electoral wards and polling
units within which the observation was conducted was determined by the following factors:
Observation was conducted in states where the DFID‘s SAVI programme currently
operates and in states which have participated in SAVI replication and knowledge
sharing activities.
The observation took place in local government areas, wards and polling units where
SAVI CSO partners are based.
SAVI CSO partners also observed the elections in local government areas, wards and
polling units where their staff is either resident and/or registered to vote.
For the purpose of easy comprehension, it will be important to present a description of the
geographical area covered during the observation exercise and within which data was
collected.
28
Source: www.inecnigeria.org/ 29
WHO World Bank report on disability, (2011); www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/en/index.html
pg. 41
Table 4.1 States and Geopolitical Zones.
GEO-POLITICAL ZONES STATES
SOUTHWEST LAGOS
OSUN
SOUTHEAST ANAMBRA
ENUGU
NORTHCENTRAL NIGER
NORTHWEST JIGAWA
KADUNA
KANO
ZAMFARA
NORTHEAST YOBE
1. The above table shows that a total of 10 states were covered during the observation. 2
states were selected from the southwest, 2 states from the southeast, 1 state from the
north central, 4 states from the northwest and only 1 state from the northeast.
2. In all, the northwest had most; 4 of the states representing 40% of the total states
covered.
Table 4.2 Details of Local Government Areas and Polling Units Covered in each
State and Geopolitical Zones
GEOPOLI
TICAL
ZONES
STAT
ES
LGAs & LCDAs
COVERED
NO.
OF
LGAs
&
LCDA
s
COVE
RED
POLLING UNITS
COVERED
NO.
OF
POLLI
NG
UNIT
S
COVE
RED
SOUTHW
EST
LAGO
S - IKEJA
- SURULERE
- AGEGE
- MUSHIN
- ALAUSA
- OREGUN
- OJO
- ALIMOS
HO
- MANGORO
9 - OLUSOS
UN
OREGUN
017
- PU 001
- PU 015
- PU 012
- PU 023
- PU 022
- PU 004B
- PU 005
- PU 004A
- PU 075
- PU 072
- PU 014
37
pg. 42
- PU 30C
- PU
032
- PU
013
- PU
015
- PU
012
- PU
016
- PU
107
- PU
108
- PU
032
-
PU066
- PU
061
- PU
002
WAR
D 1
- PU
002
WAR
D 2
- PU
032
- PU
013
- PU
015
- PU
012
- PU
016
- PU
107
- PU
108
- PU
032
- PU
066
- PU
061
- PU
pg. 43
002
WAR
D 1
- PU
002
WAR
D 2
-
OSUN - EDE
NORTH
- OLORUN
DA
- IFEDAYO
- BOKIPE
- OBOKUN
- OSOGBO
- BOLUWA
DURO
- EGBEDO
RE
- ATAKUM
OSA
WEST
- IFE EAST
- EDE
SOUTH
- IREPODU
N
- ODO-
OYIN
- OROLU
- ILA
ORANGU
N
- ODO-
OFIN
16 - WARD 8
UNIT 04
- WARD
02/003
- OSU
- WARD
02/007
- WARD
03/ PU
004
5
SOUTHEA
ST
ANAM
BRA
-- 0 -- 0
ENUG
U
-- 0 - PU002
- PU 003
- PU 004
- PU 005
- PU 007
- PU 008
- PU 001
- PU 011
- PU002
- PU 003
16
pg. 44
- PU 004
- PU 005
- PU 007
- PU 008
- PU 001
- PU 011
NORTHCE
NTRAL
NIGER -- 0 -- 0
NORTHW
EST
JIGA
WA - KANGA
MA
- HADEJIA
- HADEJIA
- KIYAMA
- KIRIKA
SAMMA
- DUTSA
- RINGIM
- RINGIM
- BATRI
KANDI
- JAHUN
- JAHUN
- ANYO
- MIGA
- GURU
TOWN
- HADEJIA
- KHAWA
- UNGUW
AR
BAREBA
RI
- WARD
004
- WARD
005
- WARD
01
- WARD
03
- WARD
003
- WARD
004
- WARD
009
- WARD
40 - ALBAS
HI PU
001
- RAMF
A PU
004
- RAMF
A PU
006
- SHAM
ARING
WARD
PU 002
- MANT
AFARI
PU
001/2
- KACH
A
WARD
PU 006
- WARD
006 PU
007
- WARD
006 PU
005
- BADU
RA PU
003
- WARD
PU 006
- PU 008
- ANYO
FADA
A/B PU
- WARD
09 PU
008
- PU 002
80
pg. 45
007
- WARD
010
- WARD
011
- WARD
08
- WARD
01
- WARD
09
- WARD
002
- WARD
006
- WARD
03
- WARD
007
- WARD
06
- WARD
005
- WARD
011
- WARD
008
- WARD
008
- WARD
001
- HADEJ
IA
MAKE
RS 001
- BAKIN
KASU
WA
001/A&
B
- BIRNI
WA
001/2
- PU 01
- PU 003
- PU 006
- PU 010
- PU 04
- PU 003
- PU 002
- PU 009
- PU 006
- PU 08
- PU 012
- PU 01
- PU 05
- PU 8
- PU 007
- PU 008
- PU 6
- PU 010
- PU 006
- PU 04
- PU 003
- PU 002
- PU 002
- ALBAS
HI PU
001
- RAMF
A PU
004
- RAMF
A PU
006
- SHAM
ARING
WARD
PU 002
pg. 46
- MANT
AFARI
PU
001/2
- KACH
A
WARD
PU 006
- WARD
006 PU
007
- WARD
006 PU
005
- BADU
RA PU
003
- WARD
PU 006
- PU 008
- ANYO
FADA
A/B PU
- WARD
09 PU
008
- PU 002
- HADEJ
IA
MAKE
RS 001
- BAKIN
KASU
WA
001/A&
B
- BIRNI
WA
001/2
- PU 01
- PU 003
- PU 006
- PU 010
- PU 04
- PU 003
- PU 002
- PU 009
- PU 006
- PU 08
pg. 47
- PU 012
- PU 01
- PU 05
- PU 8
- PU 007
- PU 008
- PU 6
- PU 010
- PU 006
- PU 04
- PU 003
- PU 002
- PU 002
-
-
-
-
-
KADU
NA - MATERA
- KAKURI
- ROMI
- HAYIN
DAN
MANI
- MANDO
ROAD
- MATERA
- KAKURI
- ROMI
- HAYIN
DAN
MANI
- MANDO
ROAD
10 - BABAND
ODO
- PU OO6
- PU OO6
- PU 011
- BABAND
ODO
- PU OO6
- PU OO6
- PU 011
8
KANO -- 0 - VAP
- VAP
- VAP
- VAP
- VAP
- BTG
- BTG
- BTG
- BTG
- BTG
- G&SI
- G&SI
- G&Si
20
pg. 48
- G&SI
- PPMCN
- PPMCN
- PPMCH
- WRWSI
- WRWSI
- WRWSI
ZAMF
ARA
-- 0 -- 0
NORTHEA
ST
YOBE -- 0 -- 0
TOTAL: 5 10 75 166
1. A total of 75 Local Government areas were covered while a total of 166 polling units were
covered in 10 states across 5 geopolitical zones.
2. Jigawa state had a total of 40 LGAs representing 53.3%; Osun State had 16 LGAs
representing 21.3%; Kaduna state had 10 LGAs representing 13.3%; while Lagos state had
the lowest of 9 LGAs representing 12%.
3. Again, JigawaState had 80 polling units representing 48.2%; Lagos sate had 37 polling
units representing 22.3%; Kano state had 20 polling units representing 12.05%; Enugu state
had 16 polling units representing 9.6%; Kaduna state had 8 polling units representing 4.8%;
while Osun had the lowest number of 5 polling units representing 3.01%.
-
-
- - 80
- - -
- TOTAL - 75 - 166
pg. 49
4.1.4 Methods of Observation, Data Collection and Analysis:
DPAI and LACSOP designed and deployed an Inclusive Election Monitoring Checklist as the
key instrument and guide for their election observers. Data was also collected based on
guided personal observation of each accredited Election Observer in line with INEC‘s
Guideline and regulations.
The Monitoring Checklist contained items which each observer is to mark as either
―available‖ (YES) or ―not available‖ (NO) respectively. These items have been identified as
key requirements for the inclusion and access for persons with disabilities in line with
international best practice and standards; but in full recognition of the social, economic,
political, environmental, technological and infrastructural peculiarities of the Nigerian
electoral process.
Other form of data used in this report was sourced through desk review of relevant literature
including official records/publications of INEC and other stakeholders.
4.1.5 Limitations:
The Monitoring Checklist used for the observation was originally designed to be ―disability‖
focused. The Checklist was designed to monitor the compliance of the conduct of election
with attitudinal, procedural, infrastructural and institutional ethics and standards of a
disability-inclusive election. It was not designed to capture electoral issues affecting women
(especially pregnant women) and the elderly. However, Observers reached a consensus to
take cognizance of other vulnerable groups including pregnant women and the elderly who
also required similar inclusivity and accessibility electoral needs.
Similarly, the Monitoring Checklist did not provide for the capturing of the numeric value as
well as the disaggregation of gender and age of voters with disabilities, pregnant women and
the elderly who turn-out to vote. As such, these issues were not included in the data gathered
and analyzed.
The monitoring Checklist also did not provide for the proper capturing of bio-data of
observers and the description of state, local government, ward and polling unit to be covered
for the exercise. However, Observers were guided to capture these details in their reports.
DPAI and LACSOP relied basically on the voluntary efforts of its members and CSO
partners to conduct these exercise due to inadequate resources. Observers in other states
outside of Lagos could not be effectively engaged for orientation and training. Hence the
seeming distortions and inconsistency in the way observation was conducted and
report/feedbacks compiled by Observers for each state.
The lack of resources also affected the scope and spread of the observation exercise. For
instance, restriction of the exercise to SAVI states and local governments where CSO
partners operated meant that no conscious plan could be made to ensure that equal number of
states was selected in each geopolitical zone or equal number of local government areas
selected in each state, etc. As it will be noticed, no state in the south-south geopolitical zone
was included.
pg. 50
Finally, in spite of these limitations, the relevance, significance and validity of this
observation exercise cannot be completely ignored. These identified limitations will serve as
yard-stick for improvements in future efforts.
4.2 State-by-State Presentation and Analysis of Data
Table 4.3 Observation of the 2015 Presidential and National Assembly
Elections in Lagos State.
STATE
Valid LAGOS
ELECTION DAY
Valid PRESIDENTIAL
LGA
Valid
AGEGE
ALAUSA
IKEJA
MUSHIN
OJO
OREGUN
SURULERE
POLLING UNIT
Valid
OLUSOSUN
OREGUN 0
PU 001
PU 004A
PU 004B
PU 005
PU 012
PU 014
pg. 51
PU 015
PU 022
PU 023
PU 072
PU 075
PU 30C
ACCESSIBILITY TO PU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS
Percent
Valid
EARLY 80.0
LATE
TOTAL
20.0
100.0
SECURITY AT PU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PWDS PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 40.0
YES
TOTAL
60.0
100.0
ELDERLY PRESENT
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 26.7
YES
TOTAL
73.3
100.0
ACCREDITATION TIME
pg. 52
Percent
Valid EARLY 73.3
LATE
TOTAL
26.7
100.0
PRIORITY VOTING
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWD
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 6.7
NOT APPLICABLE 13.3
RESPONSIVE
TOTAL
80.0
100.0
ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWD
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 6.7
RESPONSIVE
TOTAL
93.3
100.0
DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS
Cumulative
Percent
Valid NO 6.7
YES
TOTAL
93.3
100.0
1. From the above table, all polling units observed; 100% reported that polling booths were
located in areas accessible to PWDs.
2. Most of the polling units observed; 80% reported that polling officials arrived early.
3. All the polling units observed; 100% reported the presence of relevant security officials
thus guaranteeing the peace and enhancing participation of voters with disabilities.
4. Many polling units observed; 60% reported the presence of voters with disabilities, while
all polling units observed; 100% reported the presence of elderly voters. Most polling units
observed; 73.3% reported the presence and participation of pregnant women in the voting
process.
5. Most of the polling units observed; 73.3% reported that accreditation commenced early.
pg. 53
6. All polling units observed; 100% reported that electoral officials strictly complied with the
INEC policy on "Priority Voting.‖
7. Most polling units observed; 80% and 93.3% reported that the attitude of electoral officials
and other electorates respectively was responsive towards voters with disabilities and other
vulnerable electorates.
8. Most polling units observed; 93.3% reported that INEC properly and adequately displayed
posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral materials.
Finally, indicators from the above table reveal that the conduct of the 2015 Presidential and
National Assembly elections IN Lagos State was reasonably inclusive of, and accessible to
marginalized electorates including voters with disabilities, elderly voters and pregnant
women.
pg. 54
Table 4.4 Observation of the 2015 Gubernatorial Elections in Lagos State
STATE
Valid LAGOS
ELECTION DAY
Valid GUBERNATARIAL
LGA
Valid
AGEGE
ALIMOSHO
MANGORO
MUSHIN
POLLINGUNIT
Valid PU 002 W
PU 012
PU 013
PU 015
PU 016
PU 032
PU 061
PU 066
PU 107
PU 108
pg. 55
ACCESSIBILITY TO PU
Percent
Valid NO 33.3
YES
TOTAL
66.7
100.0
ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS
Percent
Valid EARLY 83.3
LATE
TOTAL
16.7
100.0
SECURITY AT PU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PWDS PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 33.3
YES
TOTAL
66.7
100.0
ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 66.7
YES
TOTAL
33.3
100.0
pg. 56
ACCREDITATION TIME
Percent
Valid EARLY 83.3
LATE
TOTAL
16.7
100.0
PRIORITY VOTING
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWD
Percent
Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0
ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWD
Percent
Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0
DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS
Cumulative
Percent
Valid NO 8.3
YES
TOTAL
91.7
100.0
1. From the above table, it can be observed that 66.7% of polling units observed show that
accessibility is high meaning that many polling units are located in accessible areas to
PWDs.
2. Observation shows that in 83.3% of polling units covered, election officials rived early;
indicating that voters with disabilities were attended to early enough and were not
subjected to hardship.
3. All polling units observed; 100% reported presence of relevant security personnel.
4. Most polling units observed; 66.7% reported the presence of various numbers of voters
with disabilities, while all polling units observed; 100% reported participation of elderly
voters. However, most polling units observed; 66.7% reported the absence of pregnant
women.
5. In most polling units observed; 83.3% reported that accreditation commenced early.
6. All polling units observed; 100% reported that INEC's policy on "Priority Voting" was
strictly observed.
pg. 57
7. Again, all polling units observed; 100% reported that the attitude of INEC staff and other
electorates to voters with disabilities and other vulnerable groups was "responsive.‖
8. Finally, the above table show that most of the polling units observed; 91.7% reported that
INEC properly and adequately displayed posters containing voting procedures and
guidelines and other electoral materials.
From the indicators contained in the above table, it can be observed that the 2015
gubernatorial elections in Lagos state was reasonably inclusive of, and accessible to voters
with disabilities and other vulnerable groups such as pregnant women and the elderly.
Issues and Trends Analysis
(i) In Lagos state, all polling units observed; 100% during the presidential and
gubernatorial elections reported that there was full compliance of electoral officials to
INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting.‖ This implied that the conduct of the 2015 general
elections (Presidential, National Assembly, Gubernatorial and State Assembly) was
reasonably inclusive of, and accessible to marginalized electorates including PWDs,
the elderly and pregnant women respectively. The number of polling units located in
areas accessible to PWDs dropped significantly from 100% in the presidential
elections to 66% in the gubernatorial elections. Although this may be due to the fact
that the Election Observers decided to observe the presidential elections in polling
units different from those in which they observed the gubernatorial elections, it should
be noted that a significantly high number of polling units are located in areas not
accessible to voters with disabilities.
(ii) While all polling units in both elections reported the presence of relevant security
officials, there was an appreciable increase of polling units which reported early arrival
of polling officials from 80% in the presidential elections to 83% in the gubernatorial
elections. Meanwhile, it was observed that number of polling unit which reported early
commencement of accreditation increased from 73% to 83% from the presidential to
the gubernatorial elections respectively. This trend indicate that vulnerable voters feel
a sense of security and high confidence to vote while early arrival and accreditation
tend to reduce the negative health impacts which a long wait would have had on voters
with physical disability, pregnant women and the elderly respectively. This in turn may
be responsible for the relatively high turnout of marginalized voters.
(iii) The number of polling units which reported presence of voters with disabilities
increased marginally from 60% during the presidential elections to 66% during the
gubernatorial elections. However, number of pregnant women dropped drastically
from 73% during the presidential election to 34% during the gubernatorial election. All
polling units in both elections reported 100% turn out of elderly voters. This trend
show that there is a reasonably wide spread of marginalized voters including those
with disabilities, the elderly and pregnant women across a large number of polling
units. It also implies a reasonably high turnout which may not be unconnected with
INEC‘s policy on priority voting.
(iv) Observations revealed that during the 2015 presidential and gubernatorial elections,
not less than 80% of polling units reported that the attitude of electoral officials and
non-disabled electorates was very responsive towards voters with disabilities, the
elderly and pregnant women. This trend indicates that awareness and capacity on
issues of inclusive electoral process is rapidly increasing among electoral officials and
non-disabled electorates. This trend may also have encouraged the noticeable (though
marginal) increase of voters with disabilities from the presidential to the gubernatorial
pg. 58
elections; as well as the sustenance of 100% turn out among elderly voters and
encouraged high turn-out of pregnant women.
(v) Finally, not less than 90% of polling units observed during the presidential and
gubernatorial elections in Lagos State reported that electoral officials properly and
adequately displayed all voting materials and made them accessible to all voters
including those with disabilities. This trend may have helped to keep all voters
including those with disabilities reasonably informed on how to conduct them during
and after voting. This may also have been responsible for the peaceful conduct of all
voters and the enhancement of the participation of voters with disabilities.
pg. 59
Table 4.5 Observation of the 2015 General Elections in Osun State
STATE
Valid OSUN
ELECTIONDAY
Valid GENERAL
LGA
Valid EDE NORTH
OLORUNDA
IFEDAYO
BOKIPE
OBOKUN
OSOGBO
BOLUWADURO
EGBEDORE
ATAKUMOSA-
WEST
IFE EAST
EDE SOUTH
IREPODUN
ODO-OYIN
OROLU
ILA ORANGUN
ODO-OFIN
POLLING UNIT
Valid - WARD 8
UNIT 04
- WARD
02/003
- OSU
- WARD
02/007
- WARD
02/004
pg. 60
ACCESSIBILITYTOPU
Percent
Valid NO 31.2
YES 68.8
Total 100.0
ARRIVALOFINECOFFICIALS
Percent
Valid EARLY 68.8
LATE 31.2
Total 100.0
SECURITYATPU
Percent
Valid NO 12.5
YES 87.5
Total 100.0
PWDs PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 31.3
YES 68.7
Total 100.0
ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 12.5
YES 87.5
Total 100.0
PREGNANTWOMENPRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 12.5
YES 87.5
Total 100.0
pg. 61
ACCREDITATIONTIME
Percent
Valid EARLY 81.2
LATE 18.8
Total 100.0
PRIORITYVOTING
Percent
Valid NO 12.5
YES 87.5
TOTAL 100.0
ATTITUDEOFINECTOPWD
Percent
Valid NONE 10.5
INDIFFER 23.0
REACTIVE 6.3
RESPONSIVE 60.2
Total 100.0
ATTITUDEOFELECTORATETOPWD
Valid Percent
NONE 12.4
INDIFFERENT
RESPONSIVE
31.3
56.3
Total 100.0
DISPLAYOFIECMATERIALS
Percent
Valid NO
YES
TOTAL
18.7
81.3
100.0
1. The above table indicates that many polling units observed; 68.8% reported that
polling units are located in areas accessible to voters with disabilities.
2. Again, many of the polling units observed; 68.8% reported that electoral officials
arrived early.
pg. 62
3. Most polling units observed; 87.5% reported that relevant security officials were
present.
4. Many polling units observed; 68.7% reported the presence of voters with disabilities,
while 87.5% reported the presence of elderly voters and pregnant women respectively.
5. Most polling units observed; 81.2% indicated that accreditation commenced early.
6. Most polling units observed; 87.5% reported strict compliance with INEC's policy on
"Priority Voting.‖
7. A simple majority of polling units observed; 56.3% and 60.2% reported that the
attitude of INEC officials and non-disabled electorates respectively was responsive to
voters with disabilities.
8. Most of the polling units observed; 81.3% reported that INEC properly and adequately
displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral
materials.
Issues and Trends Analysis
(i) In Osun state, it was observed that the level of compliance with INEC‘s policy on
priority voting during the general elections was significantly high. This implied that
the conduct of the 2015 general elections (Presidential, National Assembly,
Gubernatorial and State Assembly) was reasonably inclusive of, and accessible to
marginalized electorates including PWDs, the elderly and pregnant women
respectively.
(ii) It is also observed that other indicators of inclusive and accessible electoral process
including accessible polling units, presence of security, early arrival of electoral
officials and commencement of accreditation, etc were also significantly high.
However, observation shows that this trend is not in same proportion with turn-out and
possible participation of voters with disabilities.
(iii) In addition, it is observed that the responsive attitude among electoral officials and
non-disabled electorates stood barely above average of 50%; similar to the rate of turn-
out among voters with disabilities. This trend suggests possibility of poor awareness
and enlightenment among voters with disabilities and the larger public on issues of
inclusive electoral process.
(iv) Nonetheless, the observed trend of inclusive electoral process in Osun state remains
quite positive and reasonably favourable for the inclusion and accessibility of voters
with disabilities and other marginalized electorates.
pg. 63
Table 4.6 Observation of the 2015 General Elections in Enugu State
STATE
Valid ENUGU
ELECTIONDAY
T
Valid GENERAL
LGA
Percent
Valid 11.1
PU 001 11.1
PU 003 11.1
PU 004 11.1
PU 005 11.1
PU 007 11.1
PU 008 11.1
PU 011 11.1
PU002 11.1
Total 100.0
ACCESSIBILITYTOPU
Percent
Valid NO 22.2
YES 77.8
Total 100.0
ARRIVALOFINECOFFICIALS
Percent
Valid EARLY 77.8
LATE 22.2
Total 100.0
pg. 64
SECURITYATPU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PWDs PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 11.1
YES 88.9
Total 100.0
ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PREGNANTWOMENPRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 33.3
YES 66.7
Total 100.0
ACCREDITATIONTIME
Percent
Valid EARLY 77.8
LATE 22.2
Total 100.0
PRIORITYVOTING
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
ATTITUDEOFINECTOPWDs
Percent
Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0
pg. 65
ATTITUDEOFELECTORATETOPWDs
Percent
Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0
DISPLAYOFIECMATERIALS
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
1. From the above table, it can be observed that most of the Polling Units observed;
77.8% reported that polling units are located in areas accessible to voters with
disabilities. The same number of polling units also reported that electoral officials
arrived early to conduct elections.
2. All polling units observed; 100% reported the presence of relevant security officials.
3. Most polling units observed; 88.9% and 66.7% reported the presence and participation
of voters with disabilities and pregnant women respectively during the 2015 general
elections in Enugu State. However, all polling units reported the presence of elderly
voters.
4. Most polling units observed; 77.8% reported early commencement of accreditation of
voters.
5. All polling units observed; 100% reported strict compliance of electoral officials to
INEC's policy on "Priority Voting.‖
6. All polling units observed; 100% reported that the attitude of both electoral officials
and non-disabled electorates was "responsive" towards voters with disabilities and
other vulnerable voters.
7. All polling units observed; 100% reported that INEC properly and adequately
displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral
materials.
Issues and Trends Analysis
(i) Observations from Enugu state present a report of full compliance with INEC‘s policy
on ―Priority Voting‖ during the presidential and gubernatorial elections. This implied
that the conduct of the 2015 general elections (Presidential, National Assembly,
Gubernatorial and State Assembly) in Enugu state was reasonably inclusive of, and
accessible to marginalized electorates including PWDs, the elderly and pregnant
women respectively.
(ii) This level of full compliance with the policy on priority voting may have positively
influenced the significantly high presence of other enabling factors of inclusive
electoral process including access to polling units; presence of security; early arrival of
electoral officials and commencement of accreditation; as well as responsive attitude
among electoral officials and non-disabled electorates.
(iii) The fact that none of the indicated rated below 70% may have reasonably influenced
the high turn-out of voters with disabilities. This trend may also suggest a high level of
awareness among all stakeholders on issues of inclusive electoral process in the state.
pg. 66
Table 4.7 Observation of the 2015 General Elections in Anambra State
STATE
Valid ANAMBRA
ELECTIONDAY
Valid GENERAL
ACCESSIBILITYTOPU
Percent
Valid NO 5.3
YES 94.7
Total 100.0
ARRIVALOFINECOFFICIALS
Percent
Valid EARLY 81.6
LATE 18.4
Total 100.0
SECURITYATPU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PWDs PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 28.9
YES 71.1
Total 100.0
ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
pg. 67
PREGNANTWOMENPRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 26.3
YES 73.7
Total 100.0
ACCREDITATIONTIME
Percent
Valid EARLY 81.6
LATE 18.4
Total 100.0
PRIORITYVOTING
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
ATTITUDEOFINECTOPWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 7.9
REACTIVE 5.3
RESPONSIVE 86.8
Total 100.0
ATTITUDEOFELECTORATETOPWDs
Percent
Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0
DISPLAYOFIECMATERIALS
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
1. Most of the polling units observed; 94.7% reported that polling units are located in
areas accessible to PWDs.
2. Most of polling units observed; 81.6% reported early arrival of electoral officials.
3. All polling units observed; 100% reported the presence of relevant security officials.
4. Most of the polling units observed; 71.1% and 73.7% reported the presence and
participation of voters with disabilities and pregnant women respectively, while all
polling units had elderly voters.
pg. 68
5. Most polling units observed; 81.6% reported early accreditation of voters.
6. All polling units observed; 100% reported compliance of electoral officials to INEC's
policy of "Priority Voting.‖
7. Most polling units observed; 86.8% reported that the attitude of electoral officials was
"responsive" towards voters with disabilities However, all polling units observed
reported that non-disabled electorates exhibited same attitude.
8. Similarly, all polling units observed; 100% reported that INEC properly and
adequately displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other
electoral materials.
Issues and Trends Analysis
(i) The indicators in the above analysis show that Anambra state offers a generally
conducive atmosphere for the conduct of inclusive and accessible electoral process.
(ii) Besides the 100% rating of compliance to INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting‖, the
level of participation by marginalized voters and the level of public awareness and
responsive attitude among all stakeholders was significantly high.
pg. 69
Table 4.8 Observation of the 2015 General Elections in Niger State
STATE
Valid NIGER
ELECTIONDAY
Valid GENERAL
ACCESSIBILITY TO PU
Percent
Valid NO 14.3
YES 85.7
Total 100.0
ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS
Percent
Valid EARLY
LATE
Total
88.1
11.9
100.0
SECURITY AT PU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PWDs PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 31.0
YES 69.0
Total 100.0
PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 42.9
YES 57.1
Total 100.0
pg. 70
ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
ACCREDITATION TIME
Percent
Valid EARLY 88.1
LATE 11.9
Total 100.0
PRIORITY VOTING
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT
NOT APPLICABLE
RESPONSIVE
Total
2.4
7.1
90.5
100.0
ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWDs
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
1. Most of the polling units observed; 85.7% reported that polling units are located in
areas accessible to voters with disabilities.
2. Most of the polling units observed; 88.1% reported early arrival of electoral officials.
3. All polling units observed; 100% reported the presence of relevant security officials.
pg. 71
4. Majority of polling units observed; 69.0% and 57.1% reported presence and
participation of voters with disabilities and pregnant women respectively. However,
all polling units observed; 100% reported presence of elderly voters.
5. Most of polling units observed; 88.1% reported early commencement of accreditation.
6. All polling units observed; 100% reported compliance with INEC's policy on "Priority
Voting."‖
7. Most of polling units observed; 90.5% reported that the attitude of electoral officials
was "responsive" towards voters with disabilities. However, all polling units observed;
100% reported same attitude among non-disabled electorates.
8. Lastly, all polling units observed; 100% reported that INEC properly and adequately
displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral
materials.
Issues and Trends Analysis
(i) In Niger state, all polling units observed; 100% during the general elections reported
that there was full compliance of electoral officials to INEC‘s policy on ―Priority
Voting.‖ This implied that the conduct of the 2015 general elections (Presidential,
National Assembly, Gubernatorial and State Assembly) in Niger state, was reasonably
inclusive of, and accessible to marginalized electorates including PWDs, the elderly
and pregnant women respectively.
(ii) The state also records a significantly high presence of all other factors (including
accessibility to polling units, responsiveness of polling officials and non-disabled
electorates towards PWDs, etc) required for inclusive elections. However, observation
shows that this impressive trend did not record same proportion of turn-out among
voters with disabilities and pregnant women.
(iii) This trend of barely above average turn-out of voters with disabilities suggests possible
influence of relatively low awareness particularly among persons with disabilities as
well as other prevailing socio-cultural factors.
pg. 72
Table 4.9Observation of the 2015 General Elections in Kaduna State
STATE
Percent
Valid KADUNA 100.0
ELECTIONDAY
Percent
Valid GENERAL 100.0
LGA
Percent
Valid 61.5
HAYIN DA 7.7
KAKURI 7.7
MANDO RO 7.7
MATERA 7.7
ROMI 7.7
Total 100.0
ACCESSIBILITY TO PU
Percent
Valid NO 46.2
YES 53.8
Total 100.0
ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS
Percent
Valid EARLY 69.2
LATE 30.8
Total 100.0
SECURITY AT PU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
pg. 73
PWDs PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 46.2
YES 53.8
Total 100.0
ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 92.3
YES 7.7
Total 100.0
ACCREDITATION TIME
Percent
Valid EARLY 69.2
LATE 30.8
Total 100.0
PRIORITY VOTING
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 23.1
RESPONSIVE 76.9
Total 100.0
pg. 74
ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFER 38.5
RESPONSI 61.5
Total 100.0
DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
1. Only a simple majority of polling units observed; 53.8% reported that polling units are
located in areas accessible to voters with disabilities.
2. Many polling units observed; 69.2% reported early arrival of electoral officials.
3. All poling units observed; 100% reported the presence of relevant security officials.
4. Again, a simple majority of polling units observed; 53.8% reported the participation of
voters with disabilities. However, almost all polling units observed; 92.3% reported the
absence of pregnant women. Elderly voters remain present in all polling units
observed.
5. Majority of polling units observed; 69.2% reported early accreditation of voters.
6. All polling units observed; 100% reported compliance with INEC's policy on "Priority
Voting.‖
7. Most of the polling units observed; 76.9% reported that the attitude of electoral
officials was "responsive" towards voters with disabilities while only a majority of
61.5% reported same attitude on the part of non-disabled electorates.
8. All polling units observed; 100% reported that INEC properly and adequately
displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral
materials
Issues and Trends Analysis
(i) The trend in Kaduna state reveals that all polling units observed; 100% during the
general elections reported that there was full compliance of electoral officials to
INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting.‖ However, further analysis of issues show that the
high level of compliance did not significantly impact on the guaranty of inclusion and
access for marginalized voters especially those with disabilities and pregnant women
in conduct of the 2015 general elections in Kaduna state.
(ii) For instance, critical factors of inclusion like access to polling units; responsive
attitude among electoral officials and non-disabled electorates were not significantly
high; barely hovering between 50% to 75%. This may be responsible for the barely
above average; 60% turn-out of voters with disabilities.
(iii) Again, the socio-cultural factor restricting participation of women in the political
process may have influenced the significantly high absence of pregnant women,
notwithstanding the high turn-out of elderly voters.
(iv) Generally, the level of inclusion and access for voters with disabilities in the electoral
process is quite reasonable and in fair proportion to the barely average presence of
relevant factors of inclusive electoral process. However, this trend also reveals that
pg. 75
high compliance with the policy on priority voting is not sufficient for the guaranty of
inclusive and accessible electoral process in Kaduna state.
pg. 76
Table 4.10 Observation of the 2015 General Elections in Kano State
STATE
Valid KANO
ELECTION DAY
Percent
Valid GENERAL 100.0
ACCESSIBILITYTOPU
Percent
Valid NO 28.6
YES 71.4
Total 100.0
ARRIVALOFINECOFFICIALS
Percent
Valid EARLY 81.0
LATE 19.0
Total 100.0
SECURITYATPU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PWDs PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 14.3
YES 85.7
Total 100.0
ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
pg. 77
PREGNANTWOMENPRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 85.7
YES 14.3
Total 100.0
ACCREDITATIONTIME
Percent
Valid EARLY 76.2
LATE 23.8
Total 100.0
PRIORITYVOTING
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
ATTITUDEOFINECTOPWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 23.8
RESPONSIVE 76.2
Total 100.0
ATTITUDEOFELECTORATETOPWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 19.0
REACTIVE 4.8
RESPONSIVE 76.2
Total 100.0
DISPLAYOFIECMATERIALS
Percent
Valid NO 4.8
YES 95.2
Total 100.0
pg. 78
1. Most of the polling units observed; 71.4% reported that polling units are located in
areas accessible to PWDs.
2. Most polling units observed; 81.0% reported early arrival of electoral officials.
3. All poling units observed; 100% reported the presence of relevant security officials.
4. Most polling units observed; 85.7% reported the presence and participation of voters
with disabilities, while all polling units reported the participation of elderly voter.
However, most polling units; 85.7% reported the absence of pregnant women.
5. Most polling units observed; 76.2% reported the early commencement of accreditation.
6. All polling units observed; 100% reported compliance to INEC's policy on "Priority
Voting.‖
7. Most polling units observed; 76.2% reported that the attitude of electoral officials and
non-disabled voters respectively was "responsive" towards voters with disabilities.
8. Nearly all polling units observed; 95.2% reported that INEC properly and adequately
displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral
materials.
Issues and Trends Analysis
(i) The analysis of Kano state show that besides the compliance of all election officials to
INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting‖, other indicators and requirements for inclusive
and accessible electoral process were significantly present. However, Kano state
followed a similar trend in other northern states of very low turn-out of pregnant
women
pg. 79
Table4.11Observation of the 2015 Presidential and National Assembly Elections in
Jigawa State.
STATE
Percent
Valid JIGAWA 100.0
ELECTIONDAY
Percent
Valid PRESIDENTIAL 100.0
LGA
Percent
Valid ANYO 5.9
BATRI KA 5.9
DUTSA 5.9
GURU TOW 5.9
HADEJIA 17.6
JAHUN 11.8
KANGAMA 5.9
KHAWA 5.9
KIRIKA S 5.9
KIYAMA 5.9
MIGA 5.9
RINGIM 11.8
UNGUWAR 5.9
Total 100.0
POLLINGUNIT
Percent
Valid ALBASHI 5.9
ANYO FAD 5.9
BADURA P 5.9
BAKIN KA 5.9
BIRNIWA 5.9
HADEJIA 5.9
KACHA WA 5.9
MANTAFAR 5.9
PU 002 5.9
pg. 80
PU 008 5.9
RAMFA PU 11.8
SHAMARIN 5.9
WARD 006 11.8
WARD 09 5.9
WARD PU 5.9
Total 100.0
ACCESSIBILITY TO PU
Percent
Valid NO 11.8
YES 88.2
Total 100.0
ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS
Percent
Valid EARLY 100.0
SECURITY AT PU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PWDs PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 88.2
YES 11.8
Total 100.0
ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
pg. 81
PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 100.0
ACCREDITATION TIME
Percent
Valid EARLY 100.0
PRIORITY VOTING
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 17.6
RESPONSIVE 82.4
Total 100.0
ATTITUDE OF OTHER ELECTORATE TO PWD
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 17.6
RESPONSIVE 82.4
Total 100.0
DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS
Percent
Valid NO 5.9
YES 94.1
Total 100.0
1. Most polling units observed; 88.2% reported that polling units are located in areas
accessible to voters with disabilities.
2. All polling units observed; 100% reported early arrival of electoral officials as well as the
presence of relevant security officials respectively.
3. Most polling units observed; 88.2% reported the absence of voters with disabilities. There
were elderly voters in all polling units observed, while all polling units also recorded no
turn-out of pregnant women.
pg. 82
4. All polling units observed; 100% reported early accreditation of voters. Same was the
case with compliance with INEC's policy on "Priority Voting.‖
5. Most polling units observed; 82.4% reported that attitude of electoral officials and non-
disabled electorates respectively were "responsive" towards voters with disabilities.
6. Nearly all polling units observed; 94.1% reported that INEC properly and adequately
displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral
materials.
7. The above analysis of the presidential and national assembly elections in Jigawa state
indicate a significantly high presence of all relevant factors of inclusive electoral process.
However, there is equally a significantly low level of turn—out of voters with disabilities
and pregnant women.
pg. 83
Table 4.12 Observation of the 2015 Gubernatorial and State Assembly Elections in
Jigawa State
STATE
Percent
Valid JIGAWA 100.0
ELECTIONDAY
Percent
Valid GUBERNATORIAL 100.0
LGA
Percent
Valid WARD 001 4.3
WARD 002 4.3
WARD 003 4.3
WARD 004 8.7
WARD 005 8.7
WARD 006 4.3
WARD 007 8.7
WARD 008 8.7
WARD 009 4.3
WARD 01 8.7
WARD 010 4.3
WARD 011 8.7
WARD 03 8.7
WARD 06 4.3
WARD 08 4.3
WARD 09 4.3
Total 100.0
POLLING UNIT
Percent
Valid PU 002 13.0
PU 003 13.0
PU 006 13.0
PU 007 4.3
PU 008 4.3
PU 009 4.3
PU 01 8.7
pg. 84
PU 010 8.7
PU 012 4.3
PU 04 8.7
PU 05 4.3
PU 08 4.3
PU 6 4.3
PU 8 4.3
Total 100.0
ACCESSIBILITY TO PU
Percent
Valid NO 87.0
YES 13.0
Total 100.0
ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS
Percent
Valid EARLY 100.0
SECURITY AT PU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PWDs PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 87.0
YES 13.0
Total 100.0
ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
pg. 85
PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 100.0
ACCREDITATION TIME
Percent
Valid EARLY 100.0
PRIORITY VOTING
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 39.1
RESPONSIVE 60.9
Total 100.0
ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 39.1
RESPONSIVE 60.9
Total 100.0
DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
1. The above table reveals that most of the polling units observed; 87% reported that
polling units are located in areas not accessible to voters with disabilities.
2. All polling units observed; 100% reported early arrival of electoral officials as well as
the presence of relevant security officials…
3. Most of the polling units observed; 87% reported no turn-out of voters with
disabilities, while all polling units observed; 100% also reported no turn-out of
pregnant women. However, all polling units observed; 100% reported presence and
participation of elderly voters.
4. Again, all polling units observed; 100% reported early commencement of accreditation
and strict compliance with INEC's policy on "Priority Voting" respectively.
pg. 86
5. Majority of polling units observed; 60.9% reported that the attitude of electoral
officials and non-disabled electorates was "responsive" towards voters with
disabilities.
6. All polling units observed; 100%reportted that INEC properly and adequately
displayed posters is containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral
materials.
7. The above analysis of the Gubernatorial and state assembly elections in Jigawa state
reveals a significantly low turn-out of voters with disabilities and pregnant women.
This may be due to the near absence of accessible polling units in spite of the high
presence of other factors which are expected to enhance inclusive and accessible
electoral process.
Issues and Trends Analysis
(i) In Jigawa state, a significantly high number of polling units observed during the
general elections reported that there was full compliance of electoral officials to
INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting.‖ However, there is no consistency as to the impact
or influence of this factor on the turn-out of voters with disabilities and pregnant
women especially where the presence of accessible polling units is not also constant
across the state in spite of the high presence of other factors which promote inclusive
electoral process. This implied that the conduct of the 2015 general elections
(Presidential, National Assembly, Gubernatorial and State Assembly) in Jigawa state
were reasonably inclusive of, and accessible to marginalized electorates including
PWDs, the elderly and pregnant women respectively.
(ii) Again, the observable trend here is that the compliance with priority voting policy and
the high number of accessible polling units notwithstanding, the significantly low turn-
out of voters with disabilities and pregnant women during the presidential election may
have been influenced by low awareness and unfavourable socio-cultural practices. On
the other hand, the persistence in low turn-out of voters with disabilities and pregnant
women during the gubernatorial elections may not be completely divorced from the
high prevalence of inaccessible polling units.
(iii) The persistence in low turn-out of voters with disabilities and pregnant women for the
general elections in Jigawa state highlights the point that all factors which promote
inclusive and accessible electoral process are relevant, significant and must be
adequately present for the successful conduct of inclusive election.
pg. 87
Table 4.13 Observation of the 2015 General Elections in Yobe State
STATE
Percent
Valid YOBE 100.0
ELECTIONDAY
Percent
Valid GENERAL 100.0
ACCESSIBILITYTOPU
Percent
Valid NO 15.4
YES 84.6
Total 100.0
ARRIVALOFINECOFFICIALS
Percent
Valid EARLY 82.1
LATE 17.9
Total 100.0
SECURITYATPU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PWDs PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 28.2
YES 71.8
Total 100.0
ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PREGNANTWOMENPRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 25.6
YES 74.4
Total 100.0
pg. 88
ACCREDITATIONTIME
Percent
Valid EARLY 82.1
LATE 17.9
Total 100.0
PRIORITYVOTING
Percent
Valid NO 2.6
YES 97.4
Total 100.0
ATTITUDEOFINECTOPWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 2.6
RESPONSIVE 97.4
Total 100.0
ATTITUDEOFELECTORATETOPWDs
Percent
Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0
DISPLAYOFIECMATERIALS
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
1. Most polling units observed; 84.6% reported that polling units are located in areas
accessible to voters with disabilities.
2. Most polling units observed; 82.1% reported early arrival of electoral officials.
3. All polling units observed; 100% reported the presence of relevant security officials.
4. Most polling units observed; 71.8% and 74.4% reported the presence and participation
of voters with disabilities and pregnant women respectively. However, all polling units
reported the presence of elderly voters.
5. Most polling units observed; 82.1% reported early commencement of accreditation.
6. Nearly all polling units observed; 97.4% reported compliance with INEC's policy on
"Priority Voting.‖
7. Again, nearly all polling units observed; 97.4% reported that the attitude of electoral
officials was "responsive" towards voters with disabilities. However, all polling units
observed reported same attitude among non-disabled electorates.
pg. 89
8. Lastly, all polling units observed; 100% reported that INEC properly and adequately
displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral
materials.
Issues and Trends Analysis
(i) Yobe State presents a case of near total compliance with INEC‘s policy on ―Priority
Voting‖ and a generally high presence of other requirements of inclusive and
accessible electoral process.
(ii) Despite the challenges of insecurity (insurgence) in the state, a significantly high turn-
out of voters with disabilities and pregnant women was reported. This trend calls to
question earlier assumptions that low turn-out of this category of voters may have been
influenced by socio-cultural beliefs which restricted participation of women in socio-
political activities. Nonetheless, the trend shows a situation of reasonably high level of
awareness among all stakeholders.
pg. 90
Table 4.14 Observation of the 2015 General Elections in Zamfara State
STATE
Percent
Valid ZAMFARA 100.0
ELECTIONDAY
Percent
Valid GENERAL 100.0
ACCESSIBILITYTOPU
Percent
Valid NO 13.3
YES 86.7
Total 100.0
ARRIVALOFINECOFFICIALS
Percent
Valid EARLY 80.0
LATE 20.0
Total 100.0
SECURITYATPU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PWDs PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 20.0
YES 80.0
Total 100.0
ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PREGNANTWOMENPRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 13.3
YES 86.7
Total 100.0
pg. 91
ACCREDITATIONTIME
Percent
Valid EARLY 80.0
LATE 20.0
Total 100.0
PRIORITYVOTING
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
ATTITUDEOFINECTOPWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 6.7
REACTIVE 13.3
RESPONSIVE 80.0
Total 100.0
ATTITUDEOFELECTORATETOPWDs
Percent
Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0
DISPLAYOFIECMATERIALS
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
1. Most polling units observed; 86.7% reported that polling units are located in areas
accessible to voters with disabilities.
2. Most polling units observed; 80.0% reported early arrival of electoral officials.
3. All polling units observed; 100% reported presence of relevant security officials.
4. Most polling units observed; 80.0% and 86.7% reported the presence and participation
of voters with disabilities and pregnant women respectively, while all polling units
reported presence and participation of elderly voters.
5. Most polling units observed; 80.0% reported early commencement of accreditation.
6. All polling units observed; 100% reported compliance with INEC's policy on "Priority
Voting.‖
7. Most polling units observed; 80.0% reported that the attitude of electoral officials was
"responsive" towards voters with disabilities, while all polling units reported same
attitude among non-disabled electorates.
pg. 92
8. All polling units observed; 100% reported that INEC properly and adequately
displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral
materials.
Issues and Trends Analysis
(i) Analysis in Zamfara state shows 100% compliance with INEC‘s policy on ―Priority
Voting‖ as well as a significantly high presence of other requirements of inclusive and
accessible electoral process.
(ii) Zamfara state also presents very high turn-out of voters with disabilities and pregnant
women respectively. Again, this trend defy earlier suggestions that low turn-out of
these same category of voters may have been influenced by socio-cultural
circumstances which discourages women participation in political activities. However,
the situation in the state suggests appreciable levels of awareness among stakeholders.
pg. 93
4.2.1 General Summary
1. The level of accessibility of voters with disabilities to polling units was reasonably
high; ranging between 50% to 90% of the observed polling units in the 10 states.
2. Between 60% to 100% of polling units observed in 10 states reported early arrival of
electoral officials and commencement of accreditation respectively.
3. In terms of security, between 80% to 100% of polling units observed reported
presence of relevant security officials; meaning that voters with disabilities, women
and other vulnerable electorates did not have to worry about safety and security.
4. Observations revealed that between 50% to 100% of observed polling units reported
presence and participation of voters with disabilities in 9 states. However, only Jigawa
state recorded the lowest turn-out.
5. Similarly, participation of pregnant women was observed in 50% to 90% of polling
units in 7 states, while 3 states, comprising Jigawa, Kaduna and Kano recorded less
than 50%
6. All the polling units observed in the 10 states reported the presence and Participation
of elderly voters.
7. Virtually all polling units observed in the 10 states recorded full compliance with
INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting.‖ In addition, election materials including voter
education and information materials were displayed in accessible forms in all polling
units. This signifies a reasonable form of institutionalized recognition of inclusion and
access as key issues in the conduct of elections in Nigeria.
8. Between 50% to 100% of polling units observed in the 10 states reported that the
attitude of both electoral officials and non-disabled electorates was ―responsive‖
towards voters with disabilities, pregnant women and elderly voters respectively. This
trend can be interpreted to mean an appreciable level of awareness and acceptance of
issues of inclusion by key stakeholders in the electoral process.
9. Finally, The trends observed in the polling units in the 10 states show a reasonable
level of inclusion and access for voters with disabilities, pregnant women and elderly
voters; appreciable level of awareness among stakeholders; and a fair demonstration
of commitment to institutionalize necessary policy framework required for the
implementation of inclusive and accessible electoral process in the 2015 general
elections.
pg. 94
4.3 Zonal Analysis
Table 4.15 Northwest
STATE
Percent
JIGAWA 44.9
KADUNA 14.6
KANO 23.6
ZAMFARA
Total
16.9
100.0
ELECTION DAY
Valid GENERAL
ACCESSIBILITY TO PU
Percent
Valid NO 40.4
YES
Total
59.6
100.0
ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS
Percent
Valid EARLY 87.6
LATE
Total
12.4
100.0
SECURITY AT PU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PWDs PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 52.8
YES
Total
47.2
100.0
pg. 95
ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 80.9
YES
Total
19.1
100.0
ACCREDITATION TIME
Percent
Valid EARLY 86.5
LATE
Total
13.5
100.0
PRIORITY VOTING
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 23.6
REACTIVE 2.2
RESPONSIVE
Total
74.2
100.0
ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 23.6
REACTIVE 1.1
RESPONSIVE
Total
75.3
100.0
pg. 96
DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS
Percent
Valid NO 2.2
YES
Total
97.8
100.0
1. Only a simple majority of polling units observed in the northwest; 59.6% reported that
polling units are located in areas accessible to voters with disabilities.
2. Most polling units observed in the northwest; 87.6% reported early arrival of electoral
officials.
3. All observed polling units in the northwest reported the presence of relevant security
officials.
4. Only few polling units observed in the northwest; 47.2% reported the presence and
participation of voters with disabilities. A lower percentage; 19.1% of pregnant women
turned-out for the general elections. However, elderly voters were present in all polling
units in the northwest.
5. Most polling units observed in the northwest; 86.5% reported early commencement of
accreditation.
6. All polling units observed in the northwest reported compliance with INEC'S policy on
"Priority Voting.‖
7. Most polling units observed in the northwest; 74.2% and 75.3% reported that the
attitude of electoral officials and non-disabled electorates respectively was
"responsive" towards voters with disabilities.
8. Nearly all polling units observed in the northwest; 97.8% reported that INEC properly
and adequately displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and
other electoral materials.
Issues and Trends Analysis
(I) Although the indicators from analysis of the northwest show a significantly high
presence of virtually all requirements of an inclusive and accessible electoral process,
the very low turn-out of voters with disabilities and pregnant women could be an
indication of low awareness among voters with disabilities.
pg. 97
Table 4.16 Northeast
STATE
Valid YOBE
ELECTION DAY
Valid GENERAL
ACCESSIBILITY TO PU
Percent
Valid NO 15.4
YES
Total
84.6
100.0
ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS
Percent
Valid EARLY 82.1
LATE
Total
17.9
100.00
SECURITY AT PU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PWDs PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 28.2
YES
Total
71.8
100.0
ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
pg. 98
PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 25.6
YES
Total
74.4
100.0
ACCREDITATION TIME
Percent
Valid EARLY 82.1
LATE
Total
17.9
100.0
PRIORITY VOTING
Percent
Valid NO 2.6
YES
Total
97.4
100.0
ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 2.6
RESPONSIVE
Total
97.4
100.0
ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWDs
Percent
Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0
DISPLAYOFIECMATERIALS
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
1. Most polling units observed in the northeast; 84.6% reported that polling units are
located in areas accessible to voters with disabilities.
2. Most polling units observed in the northeast; 82.1% reported early arrival of electoral
officials.
3. All polling units observed in the northeast; 100% reported the presence of relevant
security officials.
pg. 99
4. Most polling units observed in the northeast; 71.8% and 74.4% reported the presence
and participation of voters with disabilities and pregnant women respectively.
However, all polling units reported the presence of elderly voters.
5. Most polling units observed in the northeast; 82.1% reported early commencement of
accreditation.
6. Nearly all polling units observed in the northeast; 97.4% reported compliance with
INEC's policy on "Priority Voting.‖
7. Again, nearly all polling units observed in the northeast; 97.4% reported that the
attitude of electoral officials was "responsive" towards voters with disabilities.
However, all polling units observed reported same attitude among non-disabled
electorates.
8. Lastly, all polling units observed in the northeast; 100% reported that INEC properly
and adequately displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and
other electoral materials.
Issues and Trends Analysis
(i) While it may be somewhat insufficient to use the outcome in Yobe state to draw
inferences on the trend in the northeast; especially considering the security challenges
in the area, it is also not impossible that same situation may prevail across the area. As
such, the northeast presents a case of near total compliance with INEC‘s policy on
―Priority Voting‖ and a generally high presence of other requirements of inclusive and
accessible electoral process.
(ii) Despite the challenges of insecurity (insurgence) in the northeast, a significantly high
turn-out of voters with disabilities and pregnant women was reported. This trend calls
to question earlier assumptions that low turn-out of this category of voters may have
been influenced by socio-cultural beliefs which restricted participation of women in
socio-political activities. Nonetheless, the trend shows a situation of reasonably high
level of awareness among all stakeholders.
pg. 100
Table 4.17 North Central
STATE
Valid NIGER
ELECTION DAY
Valid GENERAL
ACCESSIBILITY TO PU
Percent
Valid NO 14.3
YES
Total
85.7
100.0
ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS
Percent
Valid EARLY 88.1
LATE
Total
11.9
100.0
SECURITY AT PU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PWDs PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 31.0
YES
Total
69.0
100.0
ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
pg. 101
PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 42.9
YES
Total
57.1
100.0
ACCREDITATION TIME
Percent
Valid EARLY 88.1
LATE
Total
11.9
100.0
PRIORITY VOTING
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 2.4
NOT APPLICABLE 7.1
RESPONSIVE
Total
90.5
100.0
ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWDs
Percent
Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0
DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
1. Most of the polling units observed in the north-central; 85.7% reported that polling
units are located in areas accessible to voters with disabilities.
2. Most of the polling units observed in the north central; 88.1% reported early arrival of
electoral officials.
3. All polling units observed in the north central; 100% reported the presence of relevant
security officials.
pg. 102
4. Majority of polling units observed in the north central; 69.0% and 57.1% reported
presence and participation of voters with disabilities and pregnant women respectively,
while all polling units observed; 100% reported presence of elderly voters.
5. Most of polling units observed in the north central; 88.1% reported early
commencement of accreditation.
6. All polling units observed in the north central; 100% reported compliance with INEC's
policy on "Priority Voting.‖
7. Most of polling units observed in the north central; 90.5% reported that the attitude of
electoral officials was "responsive" towards voters with disabilities, while all polling
units observed; 100% reported same attitude among non-disabled electorates.
8. Lastly, all polling units observed in the north central; 100% reported that INEC
properly and adequately displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines
and other electoral materials.
Issues and Trends Analysis
(i) Again, we are compelled to adopt the observed trend in Niger state for the north
central. All polling units observed; 100% during the general elections reported that
there was full compliance of electoral officials to INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting.‖
This implied that the conduct of the 2015 general elections was reasonably inclusive
of, and accessible to marginalized electorates including PWDs, the elderly and
pregnant women respectively.
(ii) The north central zone also records a significantly high presence of all other factors
required for inclusive elections. However, observation shows that this impressive trend
did not record same proportion of turn-out among voters with disabilities and pregnant
women. This trend of barely above average turn-out of voters with disabilities suggests
possible influence of relatively low awareness particularly among persons with
disabilities as well as other prevailing socio-cultural factors.
pg. 103
Table 4.18 Southwest
STATE
Percent
Valid LAGOS 62.8
OSUN
Total
37.2
100.0
ELECTION DAY
Valid GENERAL
ACCESSIBILITY TO PU
Percent
Valid NO 18.6
YES
Total
81.4
100.0
ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS
Percent
Valid EARLY 79.1
LATE
Total
20.9
100.0
SECURITY AT PU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PWDs PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 39.5
YES
Total
60.5
Total
ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
pg. 104
PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 62.8
YES
Total
37.2
100.0
ACCREDITATION TIME
Percent
Valid EARLY 76.7
LATE
Total
23.3
100.0
PRIORITY VOTING
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 14.0
NOT APPLICABLE 2.3
RESPONSIVE
Total
83.7
100.0
ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 14.0
REACTIVE 2.3
RESPONSIVE
Total
83.7
100.0
DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS
Percent
Valid NO 7.0
YES
Total
93.0
100.0
1. Most polling units observed in the southwest; 81.4% reported that polling units are
located in areas accessible to voters with disabilities.
pg. 105
2. Most polling units observed in the southwest; 79.1% reported early arrival of electoral
officials.
3. Relevant security officials were present in all polling units observed in the southwest.
4. Majority of polling units observed in the southwest; 60.5% reported the presence of
voters with disabilities, while elderly voters were present in all polling units. However,
a very low turn-out of pregnant women; 37.2% was witnessed in the southwest.
5. Most polling units observed in the southwest; 76.7% reported early commencement of
accreditation.
6. All polling units observed in the southwest reported compliance with INEC's policy on
"Priority Voting.‖
7. Most polling units observed in the southwest 83.7% reported that attitude of electoral
officials and non-disabled voters respectively were "responsive" towards voters with
disabilities.
8. Nearly all polling units observed in the southwest 93.0% reported that INEC properly
and adequately displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and
other electoral materials.
Issues and Trend Analysis
(i) Observations in the southwest reveal that the key requirements for inclusive and
accessible electoral process; including compliance with INEC's policy on "Priority
Voting" was significantly present. However this is not justified by the fairly above
average turn-out of voters with disabilities in the zone.
pg. 106
Table 4.19 Southeast
STATE
Percent
Valid ANAMBRA 80.9
ENUGU
Total
19.1
100.0
ELECTION DAY
Valid GENERAL
ACCESSIBILITY TO PU
Percent
Valid NO 8.5
YES
Total
91.5
100.0
ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS
Percent
Valid EARLY 80.9
LATE
Total
19.1
100.0
SECURITY AT PU
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
PWDs PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 25.5
YES
Total
74.5
100.0
ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
pg. 107
PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT
Percent
Valid NO 27.7
YES
Total
72.3
100.0
ACCREDITATION TIME
Percent
Valid EARLY 80.9
LATE
Total
19.1
100.0
PRIORITYVOTING
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs
Percent
Valid INDIFFERENT 6.4
REACTIVE 4.3
RESPONSIVE
Total
89.4
100.0
ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWDs
Percent
Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0
DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS
Percent
Valid YES 100.0
1. Most polling units observed in the southeast; 91.5% reported that polling units are
located in areas accessible to voters with disabilities.
2. Most polling units observed in the southeast; 80.9% reported early arrival of electoral
officials.
3. All polling units observed in the southeast reported presence of relevant security
officials.
4. Most polling units observed in the southeast; 74.5% and 72.3% reported presence of
voters with disabilities and pregnant women respectively, while elderly voters were
present in all polling units.
pg. 108
5. Most polling units observed in the southeast; 80.9% reported early commencement of
accreditation.
6. All polling units observed in the southeast reported compliance with INEC's policy on
"Priority Voting.‖
7. Most polling units observed in the southeast; 89.4% reported that the attitude of
electoral officials was "responsive" towards voters with disabilities. However,
electorates in all polling units observed reported same attitude.
8. All polling units observed in the southeast reported that INEC properly and adequately
displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral
materials.
Issues and Trends Analysis
(i) Reports from the southeast show a significantly high presence of key requirements of
inclusive and accessible electoral process including compliance with INEC's policy on
"Priority Voting." There is also an appreciably high turn-out of marginalized voters
including those with disabilities, pregnant women and the elderly; while the high level
of awareness among stakeholders is demonstrated through the "responsive" attitude of
electoral officials and non-disabled electorates.
4.3.1 General Summary
1. There is no significant disparity among the geo-political zones in terms of
accessibility to polling units as 4 of the 5 zones reported more than 80% polling units
in areas accessible to voters with disabilities. However, the northwest recorded the
lowest; less than 60%
2. Report from the 5 geo-political zones indicates early arrival of electoral officials and
commencement of accreditation. This trend may have encouraged the fairly high turn-
out of voters in general especially those with disabilities, pregnant women and the
elderly.
3. Reports from the 5 geo-political zones indicate that security was guaranteed in all
observed polling units.
4. With respect to the presence and participation of voters with disabilities, the observed
trend across the 5 geo-political zones show that while the northwest recorded the
lowest; below 50%, other zones reported higher levels of turn-out; ranging between
60% to 80%
5. The turn-out of pregnant women for the general elections was significantly low in the
northwest and southwest; recording turn-out of 19.1% and 37.2% respectively.
However, other zones recorded turn-outs ranging between 50% and 80%.
6. Turn-out of elderly voters was significantly high in all the geo-political zones.
7. Reports from the 5 geo-political zones indicate that all polling units observed
complied with INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting.‖
8. Across the 5 geo-political zones, not less than 70% of electoral officials and non-
disabled electorates demonstrated ―responsive‖ attitude towards voters with
disabilities and other marginalized voters. This trend implies a significantly high level
of awareness among stakeholders on issues of inclusion.
9. Virtually all polling units observed in the 5 geo-political zones reported that electoral
officials ensured inclusion and access in the provision and use of electoral materials
including voter education materials. This trend may have enhanced the level of
awareness on issues of inclusion among stakeholders during the general elections.
pg. 109
10. Generally, it is observed that there are no significant gaps or disparities between and
among the 5 geo-political zones as far as the mainstreaming of inclusivity and
accessibility issues in the conduct of the 2015 general elections is concerned.
pg. 110
Chapter 5
MAJOR FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND
RECCCOMMENDATION
5.1 Major Findings
Based on the observation of the 2015 general elections conducted in 10 states across 5 geo-
political zones in Nigeria, and the outcome of desk review of relevant literature, the following
constitute major findings which should be considered for action:
1. Existing electoral legislative and policy frameworks including the 1999 Constitution,
the Electoral Act 2010 and INEC‘s Strategic Plan for 2012-2016 are found to be
grossly insufficient and incapable of effectively promoting inclusive and accessible
electoral process in Nigeria.
2. As observed in the 2015 general elections, the level of public awareness and
enlightenment on issues of inclusive electoral process in Nigeria is only fairly high.
However, it is grossly insufficient to elicit appropriate positive attitude and response
of the general public towards issues of inclusive electoral process.
3. There is inadequate attention, contribution and commitment of relevant scholars,
professionals, development agencies and other stakeholders towards research and
development of inclusive electoral process in Nigeria.
4. There is general lack of technical capacity on the part of EMBs, political parties, the
media, the Legislature, security agencies, CSOs and DPOs, as well as PWDs
themselves on issues and practices in inclusive electoral process.
5. There is no disability data base (DDB) with regard to management and administrative
logistics and planning for the implementation of inclusive electoral process.
6. The fairly high turn-out of voters with disabilities, elderly voters and women
(including pregnant women) in the 2015 general elections demonstrate their
willingness and capacity to effectively participate in an inclusive and accessible
electoral process once all technical, institutional, human and infrastructural
requirements are met.
7. Implementation of INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting‖ is encouraging going by the
level of compliance observed. However, some observed trends suggest that this is not
sufficient to guaranty an inclusive electoral process.
8. Observations reveal that the level of accessibility to polling units, electoral/voting
materials such as ballot papers for the blind; sing language interpretation for the deaf;
physical access for the physically challenged and simplified information for the
intellectually disabled are still very far-fetched in the attainment of inclusive and
accessible electoral process in Nigeria.
9. It was observed that political parties, the media, and mainstream CSOs lack capacity
and courage to support interested PWDs to stand for elections at any level.
pg. 111
10. It was also observed that the level of violence before, during and after elections as
well as intimidation by security officials are still significantly high to discourage
effective participation of PWDs, the elderly and women in the political process
5.2 Conclusion
In the electoral history of Nigeria, the conduct of the 2015 general elections can be said to be
the most sensitive to issues of disability, gender and social inclusion; especially considering
the significant success recorded in the historic production of voter and civic education
materials in inclusive and accessible formats for PWDs, and the implementation of the INEC
policy on ―Priority Voting.‖ This success is largely attributable to the strategic, systematic
and constructive partnership and engagement between the DPAI and LACSOP-lead CSO
sector and the Independent National Electoral Commission.
The impressive outcomes of the 2015 general elections with regard to inclusion and access
for PWDs; typified by high turn-out of voters with disabilities, women and elderly voters, and
a reasonable level of awareness and responsive attitude by electoral officials and non-
disabled electorates towards vulnerable voters are clear indications of new thresholds in
Nigeria‘s electoral history which is brought about by new approaches in citizens-lead
processes of organized and constructive demand for policy and accountability from their
elected leaders.
Accordingly, these outcomes validate the possibility of institutionalizing an inclusive
electoral process in Nigeria in line with global standards and best practices. The outcomes
also validate the efficacy of the DPAI and LACSOP-lead advocacy approaches and methods
both for scale-up towards a more national outlook in Nigeria, and for replication and
application in other jurisdictions and sectors.
DPAI, LACSOP and indeed other critical stakeholders are hopeful that all inclusivity and
accessibility requirements for persons with disabilities, women and the elderly are adequately
provided in subsequent elections in Nigeria.
5.3 Recommendations
The conduct of an inclusive and accessible electoral process requires an ―inclusive‖
approach; meaning that all stakeholders need to work inclusively; in partnership with each
other. However, it is important that each stakeholder clearly understands its strategic roles
and responsibilities. This understanding informed the structural outline of these
recommendations.
5.3.1 The Role of Media Organizations
Based on observed findings, the following recommendations are proposed as interventions
for the media:
1. Media programmes should contribute towards raising awareness of the UN
Convention on Rights of Persons With Disabilities (UNCRPD), the 1999 constitution,
the 2010 electoral act and other relevant laws, policies and regulations which promote
the rights of persons with disabilities among all persons involved in election
pg. 112
administration and monitoring, and campaign for polling station officers to allow
persons with disabilities exercise their right to vote with the greatest possible
autonomy.
2. Media organizations (print and electronic) should allocate specific quota (space and
time) to issue of inclusive elections
3. Media organizations should devote resources towards training their personnel on
coverage and reporting participation, inclusion and accessibility of PWDs in all
elections.
4. Ensure that political broadcast debates are captioned, provided with audio description
and translated into sign language.
5. The Nigerian Broadcasting Commission (NBC) should review the code of broadcast
ethics to effectively mainstream and promote inclusion and accessibility for PWDs
while ensuring compliance by media organizations.
6. Media programmes should contribute to awareness rising that polling stations have
accessible polling booths that ensure voter independence and privacy, including for all
persons with disabilities.
7. Media programmes should contribute to awareness rising on the use of inclusive and
accessible campaign venues and materials by candidates, political parties, federations,
coalitions, groups of voters, broadcast and television companies and radio stations
(publicly and privately owned).
8. Media organizations should ensure that, for the hearing impaired, electoral advertising
transmitting television advertisements contains captioning (CC1 system) and/or sign
language content of the ad content. For persons with visual impairments, Braille
ballots and templates should be used. For persons with intellectual disabilities, simple
language and info-graphics should be used.
9. Media programmes should promote civic and voter education for children and young
persons with disabilities.
10. Media programmes should encourage persons with disabilities to participate in the
activities and administration of political parties.
11. Media programmes should support awareness raising that person with disabilities who
are traditionally more discriminated against, such as persons with psychosocial or
intellectual disabilities, have equal opportunities to form and belong to representative
and other civil society organizations.
12. Media programmes should support Campaign that girls and women with disabilities
are enabled to participate in leadership roles in education, and support programs
targeted to build their capacity to participate in political life as candidates for election.
13. Media organizations should publish a yearly report of their activities on inclusive
election.
5.3.2 The Role of Security Agencies
Based on observed findings, the following recommendations are proposed as interventions by
security agencies:
1. Training of security personnel on all aspect of inclusive electoral policies and
processes
2. Ensure that persons with disabilities can register to vote and do so without
intimidation, fraud, coercion, or inducement.
3. Security personnel should ensure professionalism without bias to any group or interest
in a manner that over heat the process and breeds lack of confidence
pg. 113
4. Develop a code of conduct manual for security agencies on elections day with
particular emphasize on inclusive elections
5. To breed confidence and make the elections day more participatory, there should be a
public awareness on the channels of authority of the various security personnel as it
breeds accountability
6. In event of violence on election day security personnel should be sensitized to cater to
the safety of PWDs, elderly and pregnant women as priority
7. Protect the election process by keeping peace before, during and after Election Day
8. Allow persons with disabilities to vote with an assistant of their choice in keeping
with CRPD, whether a family member, friend, polling worker, or other person.
5.3.3 The Role of National and State Legislatures
Based on observed findings, the following recommendations are proposed as interventions by
national and state Legislature:
1. The principles of priority voting and other inclusive electoral practices should be
given legislative backing.
2. The United Nation Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disability should be
domesticated through appropriate Acts and Laws of the National and State Legislature
respectively.
3. There should be consultations with PWDs in enacting any law that have bearing on
the electoral process.
4. Enact laws that will promote effective participation of PWDs in the electoral process.
5. The legislature should work in conjunction with the executive to enact comprehensive
disability legislation.
6. The 1999 constitution should be amended to provide for the specific electoral needs
of persons with disabilities.
7. The legislature should review and revise accessibility and voter assistance provisions
in the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) and regulations in the light of non-
discrimination against all persons with disabilities.
8. The legislature should conduct it‘s over sight functions to ensure that every aspect of
the electoral process is truly inclusive of persons with disabilities.
9. The legislature should unbundle INEC from too many responsibilities to enable it
deliver a truly inclusive and accessible electoral process.
5.3.4 The Role of Local and International Development Agencies
Based on observed findings, the following recommendations are proposed as interventions by
Local and International Development Agencies:
1. Embark on comprehensive assessment of the status of inclusiveness and
accessibility of the electoral process in Nigeria by reviewing available reports and
other documented case studies.
2. Identify relevant stakeholders for the purpose of partnership and support.
3. Facilitate interaction and engagement between stakeholders
4. Support advocacy on the essence of inclusion and accessibility for PWDs in the
electoral process.
5. Provide technical assistance to relevant stakeholders to reduce or eradicate gaps
which hinder electoral inclusivity and accessibility.
6. Develop effective monitoring system to identify and track inclusivity and
accessibility situations and needs of persons with disabilities.
pg. 114
7. Support relevant agencies including INEC to commission a study on census of
PWDs in the country with a view to developing a reliable data base for electoral
and other relevant purposes.
8. Ensure that all supported projects on the electoral process (and other sect oral
issues) mainstream issues of inclusiveness and accessibility for PWDs.
9. Support key governmental agencies like INEC, security agencies, etc in promoting
inclusiveness in elections.
10. Support non-governmental groups particularly disabled people‘s organizations
(especially the Joint National Association of Persons with Disabilities
JONAPWD), mainstream CSOs, etc in inclusive electoral process interventions.
11. Increase funding to support advocacies for inclusive electoral process.
12. Provide technical assistance to:
Legislators to mainstream issues of disability and social inclusion in
legislations and other legislative functions.
Disability group CSOs to create more awareness on issues of inclusiveness
Political parties to mainstream inclusivity and accessibility of PWDs in their
structures and processes
PWDs vying for electoral offices
5.3.5 The Role of Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)
Based on observed findings, the following recommendations are proposed as interventions by
the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC):
Article 29 requires that all Contracting States protect
"the right of persons with disabilities to vote by secret ballot
in elections and public referendums”.
According to this provision, each Contracting State should provide for voting equipment
which would enable disabled voters to vote independently and secretly.
Right to vote in the CRPD
INEC is required to Develop and implement a policy on inclusive electoral process which
should include
1. Capturing of disabilities status of electorate during registration
2. Mapping of all polling units to identify and relocate inaccessible ones to new
accessible points.
3. Provision of accessible voting materials including voting cubicles, boxes and ballot
papers.
4. Review of the accreditation and voting process to occur simultaneously to encourage
more participation of PWDs.
5. To diligently prosecute electoral offenders towards reducing violence and enhancing
participation of all.
6. Training of all INEC permanent and adhoc staff on inclusive and accessible election
7. Mainstream inclusivity and accessibility in the conduct of all civic and voters
education activities.
8. Provision of accessible venues, accessible voter‘s materials, sign language interpreters
etc.
pg. 115
9. Design a template to monitor political party‘s compliance level of inclusivity and
accessibility stands.
10. Strengthening ongoing inclusive electoral processes by INEC
5.3.6 The Role of Political Parties
Based on observed findings, the following recommendations are proposed as interventions by
all political parties:
1. Political parties should develop and implement policies on inclusive electoral process
in line with existing legal and policy framework as it affects Nigeria.
2. Political parties should make provision for qualified persons with disabilities to fill
dedicated quota in terms of party employees, officers and candidates
3. Capturing of data on disabilities status of party members during party registration.
4. Train party agents, party staff and members on inclusive elections
5. Mainstream inclusivity and accessibility in the conduct of all political campaigns,
rallies and meetings by providing an accessible venues, podiums, accessible voters
materials, sign language interpreters etc
6. Political party offices, campaign venues and podium to be accessible
7. Establish a disability desk.
8. Annual publication of political party‘s compliance level of inclusiveness of PWDs.
pg. 116
APPENDIX A:
SAVI (State Accountability and Voice Initiative)
DFID Funded Programme in Nigeria
ATTENDANCE LIST FOR A 4-DAY REVIEW AND REPORTING DRAFTING SESSION
ON OBSERRVATION OF THE INCLUSION AND ACCESSIBILITY OF PERSONS WITH
DISABILITIES IN THE 2015 GENERAL ELECTION
VENUE: SAVI OFFICE, AGIDINGBI, LAGOS STATE: 8TH MAY 2015
S/N NAME ORGANISATION DESIGNATION SEX E-MAIL PHONE
NUMBER
SIGNATURE
1 Kenny Kuforiji LACSOP Member M kenkuf@yahoo.com 08023085088
2 AbimbolaJunaid Arise Nig. Women
LACSOP
Member F info@arisenigerianwoman.org 08088453707
3 Dr. Adebayo DPAI Director,
Programmes,
Research and
Documentation
M bayo4all@gmail.com 08028974873
4 OmolaraOlusaiye CSO Media
Network
Media Team Lead F omolaraeni@yahoo.com 08060563329
5 Ayo Adebusoye NNNGO/LACSOP Steering Committee
Member
M ayo.nnngo@gmail.com 08037191348
6 Bola Nuga CISHAN
LACSOP
Steering Committee
Member
M bolanuga2002@yahoo.co.uk 08098553702
7 Daniel Onwe DPAI Director of Legal
Services
M danielonwe@yahoo.com 07082079440
8 AdanlawoOlawale PaGG Member M waleadan@yahoo.com 08036545875
9 Uju Peace Okeke LACSOP/C4M C.D F mmaducentre@yahoo.com 08023907137
10 Alao Sunday IRI APO M salao@iri.org 08038906862
pg. 117
S/N NAME ORGANISATION DESIGNATION SEX E-MAIL PHONE
NUMBER
SIGNATURE
11 Rommy Mom SAVI Federal
ProgrammeManager
M rommymom@yahoo.com 08036081967
12 Ayodele Taofiq-
Fanida
CIPOGG/PAPPCC Member M ayodele4peace@yahoo.com 08098746523
13 Kayode Iyalla SAVI State Programme
Officer
M iyalladk@yahoo.ca 08023289267
14 Oluwatoyin
Nwiido
SAVI State Programme
Assistant
F yimikaglory@yahoo.com 08023965236
15 Felix Obanubi SAVI State Team Leader M fbobanubi@yahoo.com 08037176842
pg. 118
APPENDIX B MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR INCLUSIVE AND ACCESSIBLE ELECTORAL PROCESS
GENERAL INCLUSION AND ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS
SN PROVISIONS FOR INCLUSION/ACCESSIBILITY YES NO N/A COMMENTS
1. All relevant laws and policies which guide conduct of elections adequately provide for inclusion and accessibility for PWDs in line with the CRPD and other global best practices
2. All election stakeholders operate internally documented policy on inclusion and accessibility
3. Disability status of eligible voters with disabilities are properly captured during voter registration exercise and during party membership registration exercise respectively
4. Disability Desk is established to monitor effective mainstreaming of inclusive and accessibility practices and processes
5. Qualified PWDs are employed to manage established disability Desks
6. Proper training on how to attend to, and relate with all PWDs is provided for:
(i) Adhoc and permanent staff of INECthe Election Management Body;
(ii) Political party staff and officials; (iii) Security officials; (iv) Journalists and other media
practitioners; (v) Election observers; (vi) PWDs, DPOs and CSOs.
7. Voter and civic education materials including media jingles are produced in inclusive and accessible formats to accommodate all disability needs and types
8. PWDs are invited to participate in (i) all voter and civic education
programmes; (ii) election stakeholders engagement
9. PWDs are given special considerations to participate as;
(i) voters; (ii) election observers; (iii) election candidates; (iv) election media analysts.
pg. 119
10. All infrastructure used in all stages of the electoral process are physically accessible to all PWDs. They include:
(i) polling units/centres; (ii) offices of the Election Management
Body; (iii) Political party offices; (iv) Media offices; (v) Public buildings serving as
government offices; (vi) Places used as campaign and meeting
venues.
11. All buildings/venues, movable objects, voting materials, electoral officials and separate voting queue designated for PWDs are clearly marked and tagged for easy identification
12. PWDs are accompanied by persons of their choice to assist them participate in all electoral activities including:
(i) Voter and civic engagement meetings;
(ii) Political party campaign; (iii) Voter registration; (iv) Voting/ballot casting.
13. Inclusive Election Information Clearing House and Communication Channels are opened to provide help and support to PWDs and DPOs
pg. 120
SPECIFIC DISABILITY INCLUSION AND ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS
SN PROVISIONS FOR INCLUSION/ACCESSIBILITY
YES NO N/A COMMENTS
1. All electoral materials are properly captioned in simple language with proper illustrations. They include:
(i) Political campaign materials;
(ii) Voter and civic education materials;
(iii) Voting materials (including ballot papers and boxes)
2. Election/voting materials are properly captioned in simple language with proper illustrations
3. There is proper marking/labelling of the polling booth, registration desks and other significant places within and around the polling centre
4. Electoral officials are
properly trained (in simple sign language)to provide necessary assistance to deaf persons
5. Professional Sign Language Interpreters are provided at the final collation centre where final results of elections are announced.
A labelled polling station
pg. 121
6. Election/voting materials (ballot papers) are produced in Braille or tactile formats
7. There are no objects or
obstacles on walk ways leading to the polling booth and other immediate surroundings of the polling centre
8. Amputees (Persons without fingers and thumbs) are allowed to use their toes while those without either limbs are allowed to vote with the support of their chosen assistant
9. Gutters or drainages in and around polling units are properly covered with either wooding or concrete slabs to prevent falling
10. Wooding or concrete ramps are provided for wheel chair users to ensure easy accessibility
11. Accessible polling booth
which allow easy entry and exit for wheel chair users is used
12. Polling booth and registration tables are placed in very accessible locations
pg. 123
APPENDIX C
CITIZENS MANDATE PROTECTION
Media To ensure equal access to and coverage of all competing
political parties and candidates; To present accurate information on parties programmes and
campaigns. To provide fair and informative reporting on the election
process and the elections law; and To educate and enlighten the citizens about their rights and
responsibilities in elections.
CSOs/FBOs/CBOs To monitor/observe the electoral processes including the
Election activities. Advocate and lobby for appropriate electoral laws to guide
the conduct of elections. To raise awareness of citizens to vote and protect their
votes.
Political Parties Ensure that the party constitutions are widely disseminated
among members and that the provisions of the constitutions are respected.
Practice internal democracy in all areas of their operations, particularly in the selection of party leaders and the nomination of candidates for elections.
Establish independent and credible processes for resolving disputes.
Facilitate participation of marginalized groups including women, persons with disabilities and youths in the political process through the application of affirmative action policies and practices.
Judiciary
Administer the oath of office to elected officials,
Address election petitions through judicial means,
Ensure justice through fair hearing and quick dispensation of cases.
Traditional/religious group
To enlighten their members on the right to vote.
Play a major role in promoting the culture of free and fair elections.
Commit to devote time, energy and resources to the
MANDATE
PROTECTION
FACT SHEET
THIS MESSAGE IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE LAGOS STATE CIVIL
SOCIETY PARTNERSHIP (LACSOP) WITH SUPPORT FROM THE STATE
ACCOUNTABILITY AND VOICE INITIATIVE (SAVI)/DFID
How to protect your mandate?
1. Know parties manifestos, statement
and constitution
2. Report incidence of electoral malpractices to police, media, and other interest groups
3. Encourage the next person to register and vote
4. Use of FOI Act to access information and protect electoral integrity
5. identify and engage with existing institutions/organizations with same ideology
6. Build relationship with law enforcement agencies
7. Introduce and organize community Poll Mandate Watchers (PMW) to observe elections process within their community.
Collect Evidence and Base Your Reports on Facts When you experience or witness
electoral malpractice and fraud during
the electoral process, it is important to
report such incidents to the appropriate
authority and to the media. It is equally
important that you base your complaint
or report on detailed facts and that you
have evidence ready if possible. Video
cameras, tape recorders, and even the
cameras on your mobile phones can be
useful tools to document incidents.
Otherwise, statements made by
witnesses to a situation can also serve
as evidence of electoral misconduct.
ABOUT LACSOP
The Lagos State Civil Society
Partnership (LACSOP) is a platform of
major civil society networks and
coalitions working with the Lagos state
Government – the executive as well as
the legislature, for the effective
implementation of critical development
issues.
LACSOP’s focus areas include:
Improved voice and accountability in governance
Support better service delivery at the LGA level
Support to participatory legislative process in Lagos State
HELP LINE: 0909 1987409
Email: info@lacsop.org
Facebook: www.facebook/LACSOP
Twitter: @LACSOP
MANDATE PROTECTION TEAM
Barr. Adebusoye Ayo Vivian Emesowum Dr. Adebayo A. S AbimbolaJunaid OmolaraOlusaiye Ayodele Taofiq-Fanida Olusola Babalola Hannah Boshen Adotse Samuel
GRAPHIC DESIGN BY GRASSROOT PEOPLE AND GENDER DEVELOPMENT CENTER
pg. 124
What is Democracy?
In the simplest sense, Democracy is a government of the people, by the people and for the people,
in a democratic political system; government power is legitimized by the consent of the governed
(people).Democracy is thus a political system of governance that, through a number of democratic
institutions and procedures, secures its citizens a range of civil and political liberties and regularly allows
them to participate and compete in free and fair elections.
What is Mandate protection? “Election mandate” involves the relationship between the people’s votes and the outcomes of an election;
people’s votes and their participation in the electoral process represent their giving consent to the
candidates for whom they vote to govern on their behalf. In Nigeria, candidates who win a majority of
votes are considered to have won the people’s mandate to govern. The people’s right to choose and
reject representatives at the ballot box should be revered, and participating in an election is a fundamental
right. However, it is also citizens’ responsibility to engage in the electoral process, to stand up against
malpractice, and to ensure that the elections in their country are meaningful.
monitoring of all stages of the electoral process.
Election observer To observe elections and give unbiased reports
Who ensures that our mandate is Protected
Stakeholders and their Responsibilities
Government
Should create a level playing ground for all political parties and persons.
Creating a truly independent multi stakeholder INEC.
Provide adequate funding for INEC
INEC/SIEC
Organizing, undertaking, and supervising all elections;
Prepare, maintain and update the registration of voters;
Monitor campaigns of all political parties including their finances;
Conduct voter’s/ civic education;
Counting, recording and announcing results;
Prosecuting violations of the Electoral Act.
Law enforcement/Security
They are to protect the election process by keeping peace during and after Election Day
Citizens
Seek to know and understand party manifestoes
Articulate community needs and engage political office seekers on their planned programme
Register to vote and participate in the voting exercise. Observe the count and ensure that votes are not stolen
top related