 The Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC says it has little role to play in the conduct of direct primaries of political parties and stakeholders bicker as Lagos for Lagos joined the People's Democratic Party, PDP, over irreconcilable differences. Well this is Plus Politics, I am Mary Anacorn. The Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC says it has very little role to play in the conduct of direct primaries and bi-political parties. Professor Yakubu Makmud, INEC chairman disclosed this when he met with members of the House of Representatives Committee on Appropriation in Ibucha, the meeting following a resolution of the House mandating the committee to interface with INEC on the cost implication of direct primaries parties as contained in the 2021 Electoral Act Amendment Bill. Representative Mokta Bakterra for APC Bologna stated that Makmud told lawmakers that the conduct and funding of primaries were basically the function of political parties and not the empire. Well joining us to discuss this is Gideo Lagoon, he is a legal practitioner, and Beodum show me a political analyst. Thank you so much gentlemen for joining us. Thank you very much, it's a pleasure to join you. Okay great great great. Before we start this conversation, last week I spoke with a commissioner in INEC in charge of voter education, Mr. Festa Sokoye, and I did ask a question about this direct primaries issue and INEC's position on it, the cost implication, and the bickering over it. Let's take a look at what the INEC commissioner said and then we will start this conversation. You see the commission really does not want to get involved in the debate on the issue of direct or indirect primaries. The truth of the matter is that within the existing legal framework, the Electoral Act 2010 as amended that is in existence as of today. The law provides that political parties may adopt direct or indirect primaries or indirect primaries. We have monitored the direct primaries by some political parties, so this direct primaries is not new to our electoral legal framework. Yes there is no doubt whatsoever that if all the political parties adopt direct primaries it will involve cost and that indirect primaries involves less cost. But that is neither here nor there. What is fundamental is that Section 4 of the Constitution of Nigeria gives the National Assembly the power to make laws for this country. Secondly, if you also look at Section 228 of the Constitution, it also gives the National Assembly the power to make laws relating to the internet democracy within political parties, including their primaries. So as far as the commission is concerned, if in their wisdom the National Assembly makes provision for only indirect primaries and the President assays to meet, we will find ways and means of implementing the internet of the law, because that is what we are obligated to do. So I'm going to start with you, Ambassador Logo. Mr Okoye was saying obviously diplomatically that he does not want to get into that conversation or the debate about direct primaries and the funding. But looking at the existing laws and of course the electoral act and what the National Assembly is proposing now, how feasible is this especially with the tag of billions for conducting the selections? Apparently it's the responsibility of the parties to fund their primaries. What we talk about primary is we talk about the first aspect of presenting candidates to go and represent the parties at the general elections and that is left to the internet democracy of the party. And I think the debate now is whether it's costlier to have direct primaries or by delegates which is indirect and the third one that is allowed under the act that is now being amended is by a consensus where you can all agree that okay we are not even going to conduct any activity, we just consider the fact that this person should go and represent us at the general polls. And of course it's not the business of INEG to make money available at the primary level. I think the role of INEG as stipulated is minimal, which is to carry out oversight functions and monitor the activities in a way that we have credible free and fair primaries. And then for those who believe that they have the popularity with the words and the grassroots, they may not be afraid of the primary selection because when you talk about the primary, all the card holders in the party can come out to choose who their representative by the election will be. When you talk of indirect, that means some delegates will go and represent them at the convention to choose candidates. And the candidates that are chosen there, that decision becomes binding on the other parties. So if you ask me, the direct primaries appear to be more representative of democracy than the indirect. And when we even talk about the cost, it's probably because we are making reference to our society where the processes are so highly monetized. In an environment where you can deploy IT, you may not need to gather in a physical space to carry out direct primaries or indirect primaries. When a decision will come, for instance, may be exposed to corruption like incentives, giving them money to ensure that they vote for a particular candidate, then you may be talking of cost. And for anyone who wants to venture into politics, you should expect that it's capital intensive. But then credibility of those who are involved in this direct primaries process is what has been called to question because you just mentioned the issue of technology. We're yet to deal with the teething problems that INEC is facing, especially with what we saw in Anambra, the beavers, malfunctioning. These things will always happen. But then when we want to develop or push for such technology used during direct primaries, then we need to also look at the credibility of the people who are handling the technical part of it. Who's to say that there's not going to also be some form of inducement virtually? You know, within the human circle, you may never have a perfect presentation. But you upscale, like you brilliantly mentioned now, we have the infrastructure gap to support what is ideal. Whether we like it or not, the economy of the future, the governance system of the future is artificial intelligence driven. So we need to start from providing electricity, providing the infrastructure that will support effectiveness and efficiency. And if that is the direction the government is moving, then you provide the template for those who will operate within the system to keen to it. If, for example, now by dividends of governance, we have constant electricity, IT facilities are affordable, people can engage virtually, effectively. Then we won't have to be talking about mobilizing millions of people to Abu Jhabi because we want to conduct primary elections. So that's what we are saying. So and elections are critically tied to governance. When people are elected into offices, they should look at the future and put things in place that we enhance performance, improve our circumstances and ensure that we catch up with the system in the global arena. There are examples of good governance. So for me, if we have these challenges, it's because we have made a choice not to progress as a nation. And of course, if it is very important to the nation, we prioritize and ensure that those things are put in place. They are not rocket science. They are not impossibilities. They are possible. Some countries of the world run this system effectively. Okay. Well, let me come to you, Mr. Choumi. So there are a group of CSOs who have disputed this 500 billion claim just as you have come up with an IT aspect or a perspective as to how we can reduce costing. They're not just asking that the federal government, just to send the idea of 500 billion cost. They're also questioning why it's taking Mr. President so long to extend to this bill, even after INEC has responded to his message. You know, let's put it in perspective. The president has about 30 days to ascend the bill of veto it on the transfer to his office by the National Assembly. And I think this was passed to him on the 19th of November 2021. And it should be expected that he will consult the Attorney General of the Federation, the INEC, the National Assembly, which he has done. And of course, the political parties, because the INEC had to advise the president that, okay, why don't you talk to the direct stakeholders in this, find out what their policies are before you ascend to it. And some stakeholders are saying, even without the consultations, go ahead and ascend to it. Then if we have issues, we raise it, which may be costlier, because that means we may have to start going through the process again. And it is expected also that as a government, the government should have sat down through the value chain of this amendment to look at the best practice globally and incorporate that into what we are trying to put in place, particularly when this is an attempt to improve on the Electoral Act of year 2010. And if you look at the Act of 2010, it gives permission, like I mentioned, to three approaches to primaries, the direct primaries, the indirect and the consensus. But this time around, under the amendment, the legislatures are only recommending that only direct primaries should be approved for all parties to choose their candidates that will be presented at the general elections. While some are comfortable with this, some are not comfortable. And talking about the cost, I mentioned earlier, one of the advantages of technology is to help you reduce costs. I recall when the COVID-19 pandemic swept in early 2020, even the Federal Executive Council meetings were held virtually. And you can imagine how much it cost the nation to hold these meetings physically. The meetings of presidents of headquarters were held virtually. So you can imagine the cost of traveling with the team that we go with the president. So by and large, if we want to make progress, the possibilities are there. So it's now a matter of whether we are dragging our feet or in lockdown to catch up with the global environment. Like I said earlier, right now, it's all about artificial intelligence. And talking about the infrastructure, you look at places like the UAE, they have the Ministry of Artificial Intelligence, they're already engaging the future economy. So why can't we also do that? But it appears that we are still at the rudimentary level. And when we choose to remain there, we have difficulties even implementing the laws. I don't know if I agree with you that we are at the rudimentary level, because I mean, Nigerians have been in the forefront of coding and all kinds of things in terms of AI and tech. But it is not necessarily we. I'm guessing that this should have been, is the government ready to embrace this level of artificial intelligence or technology in our electoral system? Remember, some years ago, even early this year, the issue of the e-voting has continuously been debated. It was almost a push and shove for us to even include the idea of electronically transmitting results. So really, is it the people that are unable or is it the government that's unwilling? You know, the role of the government is to regulate the society. So the government should not be seen to be limbed in dealing with situations. So if the government wants it done, it can be done. We see these things happening. I mean, the level of security to find around Asu Bila. Could I say of section 14, subsection 2 of the Nigerian Constitution in Nigeria, that I said the security and the welfare of the people should be the primary purpose of government has any meaning. So on possibilities, these things are possible. And when did government put this in place? The people don't have any excuse going forward. For example, if this amendment flies through and we stand by the fact that all parties must conduct their primaries through direct approach, then who is going to contend with that? It becomes the law. So whatever the government puts in place, we regulate the activities. And that is why we keep advising that you look out through the window and try to find out how some countries have achieved it. Like I said, for example, in Singapore, Singapore is already considering the future of the workplace. What will happen in the future? And they are preparing their people for that encounter. And that is what we are saying. And when I made reference to being at the rudimentary level, I believe you understand me. A level where sometimes private personal interests get what the policy makers will roll out. So if people are more powerful than those who are in favor, we will escalate our governance mindset. Then you go for what is best. As we engage on this topic right now, we have some professional organizations that have been carrying out e-booting for years. I belong to one. And it's been so smooth. Before the day of the AGM, you can cast your votes in your car, in your sitting room, anyway. These devices will work if we want them to work. But when you have those who will not allow them to work, they will scuttle everything. And it's costly for us. The big question now is, are you ready for the progress? For example, when the COVID-19 came and there was a lockdown, people stayed at home. It wasn't a matter of whether you had an option or not. And as we speak right now, I think the government just gave a directive that civil servants below the grade level 12 could return to office physically. Some of them have been operating virtually. So whoever thought that that system could come in, right now we are talking about hybrid HR management. You can work in the physical office, work from home, work from anywhere as long as you are delivering. So these are possibilities. The world will not remain the same. Interesting. Go and study the Brazilian template, get around the world and see the great things that are happening. I mean, recently an election took place in the UK, who heard about the rankos and the rankos. So it's about choice. And the government is the biggest stakeholder when it comes to formulating policies and implementing policies. So the direction they take us, either to pay off our indebtedness extensively, and we did pay off. So the government should not be seen to be given excuses. You must deliver and you must, right now with the globalization concept, you are not alone. You look around you, see the countries that are making progress around the world that you study what they have done. And you put those as part of your policy implementation. And you can, I mean, you can look at Rwanda, you can look at Tanzania, you can look at Australia, Sweden, you know, without living in Nigeria, you can study best practices around the world. You can, if you even want to do an informal study in Harvard Business School without living lucky in Lagos there, these are possibilities. It is a power of IT. And that is where I stand, that we can make progress. While I agree with you, while I agree with you and the position that you've taken, it takes me back again to, you know, the hiccups, even as we're having this conversation, we're having to hold our breaths to be sure that you can hear us from the other end. So I don't know if we're really ripe enough in terms of the technology, the bandwidth, if we have the way we saw. But then again, from this conversation, it looks like that's what the political parties have to deal with and worry about. But going forward, 2022 is just around the corner. We're just a few weeks, if not two and a half weeks away from 2022, which is campaign season, which is a campaign year. Now, if we do not get this bill signed into law early enough, how do we make sure that 2023 is free for incredible already? We have had, or INEC, right, that has had opportunities to test, you know, to see if their up to power was the kind of electronic or e-voting system that we're aspiring to. And we've continuously seen almost the same kind of issues creep up. So really, are we probably punching above our weight? You know, the elections may go on. Don't forget that this amendment has been on. Before the 2019 election, we expected some amendments to be assented to. They were never assented to and the elections went on. You see, so like I said, it's either the president assents to this or you battle it or whatever the case may be. If that is not done, then the old act, we've been in operation and that means the status quo of the fact that you can have direct primaries, indirect primaries, or consensus primaries, we hold and we go on. And whether our elections will be free, fair, and credible, is a big question for what we choose to deploy. And I think we have made a bit of progress in that area. If we look at the recent Anambra State election by virtue of the governorship election, by virtue of the ways of the federal government and the things that happened, the insecurity, many would have expected that some unnecessary influence would have been wielded. But if people insisted, no, this is the candidate we need. And then all the arms of government came together and the relevant stakeholders came together. So if we can choose to allow the will of the people to prevail, then we may begin to move in the direction of putting in place those we trust to represent our interests. And that, again, is a very strong argument for the proponents of direct primaries. If I am a member of the party, I should be giving the direct access to choose those we are going to represent me. And I may now decide not to exercise that mandate. And this is what we are talking about. And democracy is a government of the people, by the people and for the people. So if you are going to bat my hair, I should be expected to sit down in that salon. You don't cut my hair in a sense. So when we get to that level, even politicians would begin to ensure that they do what we please the people. And having said that, we need to give confidence to our environment, which is already written, whether it's direct or indirect, there are still possibilities and the temptations of corruption. Because, you know, some will tell you, it's all about stomach infrastructure. It's all about getting what I can get. So that is why at the general level, we must develop this country and bring disparity to the people. We have to go. Thank you so much, Barista Jireh Ulogun, for being part of the conversation. Unfortunately, we lost the connection with Mr. Showami. Thank you so much for being here. Thank you. God bless Nigeria. All right. Well, thank you all for staying with us. Coming up on Plus Politics, the move of the Lagos for Lagos group to join the PDP in this state has been greeted with criticism. We'll take a short break now.