DEFINITION:
An election boycott is the lawful refusal to honour an election by a group of voters, each of whom abstains from voting, for varying legitimate reasons.
As witnessed in several member Nations of the United Nation in the past, the legal act Boycotting may be used as a form of political protest where voters feel that electoral fraud is likely, or that the electoral system is biased against its candidates, that the polity organizing the election lacks legitimacy, or that the candidates running are very unpopular.
In jurisdictions with compulsory voting, a boycott may amount to an act of civil disobedience. Alternatively, supporters of the boycott may be able to cast blank votes or vote for "none of the above". Boycotting voters may belong to a particular regional or ethnic group. A particular political party or candidate may refuse to run in the election and urges its supporters to boycott the vote.
THE SELF DETERMINATION CASES:
When an aggrieved people legally seek to exit an existing Nation all to become a new independent better Nation, for cogent reasons towards healthier better living, it is termed as Self Determination. This act is lawfully backed up by the United Nations and all her allies.
Hence the aggrieved people are at liberty to be apolitical, so to drive home their grievances and resolve to become an independent Nation, via repeated Election Boycotts, in the scenario where the existing Nation is unwilling to conduct a plebiscite for the grieving section of the existing Nation.
Also in this case of a referendum/ plebiscite, an election boycott may be used as a voting tactics, by opponents of the proposition for self determination. If the referendum requires a minimum turnout to be valid, the boycott may prevent this quorum being reached and frustrate the demands of those seeking self determination via public voting.
BOYCOTT AND ELECTIONS:
In general elections, ethnicities, tribes, religions, individuals and political parties will often boycott in order to protest the ruling party's unfavorable policies with the hope that when voters do not show up the elections will be deemed illegitimate by international observers. Most Boycotts in civilized history succeeded via well negotiated external observations, influence and alliances.
SANCTIONS:
The UNSC can activate a floor of political cum economic sanctions at the UNGA, when the repeated boycotts by the aggrieved section of an existing Nation are verified to be related to the following:
1. Human right violations.
2. Ethnic cleansing.
3. Political Nepotism.
4. All acts of Terrorism.
5. Violent Religious Intolerance.
6. Premeditated Genocide.
The sanctions will initially serve as a warning but when the sanctioned Nation remains defiant, stiffer sanctions may follow and international aid given to the oppressed section of the sanctioned country; to quell their suffering permanently, prevent an outbreak of war and reconcile the neighbouring Nations after the plebiscite favours the oppressed Nation to become independent.
~~~~||~~~~||~~~~||~~~~||~~~~||~~~~
ME:
Obviously there is nothing wrong with an Election Boycott and there is neither a stipulated time table nor situational indices for a boycott to be legitimate. The legitimacy of a boycott is solely determined by an aggrieved people, just as the IPOB is lawfully doing today.
That educated minds are against the IPOB election boycott gives me deep concern about the Blackman and our inability to boldly pursue our dreams and quests in focused consistency, until our primary aims are achieved. Even Nelson Mandela suffered same with the ANC for over 35 years before he finally succeeded over the apartheid era.
The UNSC have given the IPOB their apolitical conditions for a referendum to hold and the IPOB is doing her best to stay consistently compliant, to these conditions, until we restore our Biafran Nation. It is impossible for the IPOB to bend, or compromise or work against these conditions; whether five (5

hymmm

On referendum we stand. No Election in Biafra land. Omadike has spoken. No Election.

Nice, but sadly the east sees Atiku as a way out because of Obi, had Atiku not picked Obi maybe Kanu's call would have been heeded