365 days ago Nigeria recorded history when an incumbent president of the country conceded victory to his challenger in a presidential election.

By Charles Kumolu


THE uniqueness of Nigeria’s 2015 presidential poll in the view of many Nigerians was that it was the first election in the nation’s history in which the incumbent political party lost and accepted. But beyond the outcome of the election was the effort put in by the election management body and other stakeholders in the organisation of the poll and in the management of the outcome.

12 months after the result of the election was announced, the rarity of the occurrence may have begun to settle on Nigerians, but whether the lessons and the process have been ingrained into the body politic remains a matter of dispute. This is especially buttressed by the rancour that trailed many of the elections that have been organised in the recent past.

INEC's role: The Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, led by former unionist, Prof. Attahiru Jega had in the years leading to the 2015 begun the process of reengineering the election process through improving the integrity of the voter register using the card reader and the Permanent Voter Cards, PVCs.

Besides, INEC as led by Jega had also introduced the use of academics as returning officers, a situation that in some cases helped to cushion the fears of many voters who had in the past been used to election officers easily being swayed by the machinations of political thugs and their sponsors.

Besides, the efforts of the INEC, a number of prominent Nigerians led by the erstwhile head of state, Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar were beneath the scene also involved in building peace between the two major presidential candidates, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP and Gen. Muhammadu Buhari of the All Progressives Congress, APC.

At a point before the election, the committee brought the two men together where they signed an agreement to allow the will of the people to prevail. The committee many Nigerians noted, above all else helped to ensure that the extremities that hitherto attended reactions to presidential elections did not ensue after the March 28, presidential election.

However, the path and preparations taken by the two major political parties ahead of the election helped to get them the results that they obtained.

PDP: The PDP’s inaugural presidential campaign in Lagos was literally full of sound, furry which shadowed the campaigns in the rest of the country.

Dr. Jonathan bristled with enthusiasm as he condemned without naming his rival as one who would lock up many Nigerians and restrict their democratic liberty. It was an unusual assault by the then president who was actually fighting the battle of his life.

There were instances of other party chieftains bashing Buhari, former President Olusegun Obasanjo and anyone considered opposed to its presidential candidate.

Among the more prominent figures involved were Jonathan’s campaign spokesperson, Chief Femi Fani-Kayode, Ekiti State Governor, Ayo Fayose and the First Lady, Mrs. Patience Jonathan. Mrs. Jonathan went to the extent of profiling parts of the country.

Public disposition

At some points, the unrestrained vulgar affronts nearly passed for campaign policies to the extent that it negatively impacted on the public disposition towards the party and its candidate.

Until the eve of the poll, the general impression was that the PDP’s presidential campaign was obviously awful in manners that defied logic and common sense.

In all, the party’s pre-election showing was in total violation of the critical ingredients of the Abuja Accord which committed the parties to issue-based campaigns at national states and local government levels.

Surprisingly, the veracity of the foregoing was not even lost on the party as it recently owned up to have been responsible for the unimpressive campaign that led to its defeat.

Putting it more succinctly, its National Publicity Secretary, Chief Olisa Metuh said: “The decision of the Presidential Campaign Organization to adopt and execute a hate campaign strategy against the then presidential candidate of the APC, Gen.

Muhammadu Buhari led to the failure of PDP.
"We (NWC members) did not lead the party to failure. We were not involved in the campaigns and our advice was ignored. If we had handled the campaign, Mr. President would have won the election. We cannot be held responsible when our advice was ignored.”

APC: Latching on public impulse regarding the state of the nation, the APC, which came out of a merger of three major political parties marketed itself with the message of change.

Presidential campaign

Indeed, change which simply translates to paradigm shift was considered an apt contrast to the PDP’s call for continuity.

Prior to the commencement of the presidential campaign in Port-Harcourt, the party had unveiled its manifesto in Abuja where it made progressively inclined pledges.

Prominent among the promises were job creation , fight against corruption, improved social and physical infrastructure, improved insecurity, social welfare, creation of state police and transparent governance, accelerated power supply, food security, affordable health care, accelerated economic growth, Integrated transport network and devolution of power among others.

The dexterity with which the party fixated its campaign on change was such that many expected it to take up the challenge of participating in a presidential debate. But that was not to be as the APC deliberately dashed the expectation.

The feasibility of the now contentious social welfare package for vulnerable Nigerians was an area where analysts actually wanted clarity considering the falling oil prices.

In fact, the possibility question gained more visibility with Prof Charles Soludo’s article where he doubted how feasible the programmes.

"The APC manifesto contains some good principles and wish-lists, but as a blue print for Nigeria’s security and prosperity, it is largely hollow. The numbers do not add up. As a first point, Buhari and his team must realize that they do not yet have a coherent, credible agenda that is consistent with the fundamentals of the economy currently," he stated.

Practically, all through the campaigns, the electorate were in the dark regarding how funds for the realisation of the promises would be met.
Things that could have passed for the party’s failings on the campaign trail as represented by the foregoing, never mattered since the PDP seemed obviously averse to presenting an explicit agenda for governance.

Bearing in mind the axiom that issue based campaign presents the perfect antithesis of hate speech, the APC stuck to its style while promoting the change agenda.

Instead of mudslinging and bigotry, the conversation was around various questions of public policy.

Thus, it was not shocking that the electorate succumbed to issue based voting, resulting in phenomenal electoral outcome.



source:

Pfft