ABSTRACT
The research project was designed to study the stated electoral commission and development of democracy in Nigeria, a study of Imo State Electoral Commission, the problem under investigation is that all the benefits and attributes of what the election process should mean cannot be associated with Nigeria as a democratic society. The study was intended to examine the state electoral commission to know if the citizen’s right of Franchise is well exercise and if the electoral commission is conducting a free and affair election as to be the result in a democratic society. Questionnaires were distributed to help collect data, the data collected were statistically organized and analyzed by using percentage and the researcher discovered that the state electoral commission in some of the elections conducted never meets that result of free and fair election as the fruit of democracy. During the course of the research, the researcher found that many are time government influence that activities of the commission and adequate provision are not made for the commission to activities.
TABLE CONTENTS
Title page - - - - -
Approval page - - - - -
Dedication - - - - -
Acknowledgment - - - -
Abstract - - - - -
Table of contents - - - -
Chapter One
1.0 Introduction - - - -
1.1 Background of the study - - -
1.2 Statement of the problem - - -
1.3 Objective of the study - - -
1.4 Research question - - - -
1.5 Significance of the study - - -
1.6 Scope of the study - - - -
1.7 Limitation of the study - - -
1.8 Definition of terms - - - -
Chapter Two
2.0 Literature review - - - -
2.1 Introduction - - - -
2.2 Electoral Administration and Democratic - -
2.3 Nigeria Electoral Antecedent - - -
2.4 Recent Efforts at Electoral Performs - -
2.5 Roles of the Electoral Commission - -
2.6 Nigeria Electoral History in Perspective - -
2.7 Elections under the colonial period - -
2.8 Election in post Independence Nigeria - -
Reference - - - -
Chapter Three
3.0 Research design and methodology - -
3.1 Introduction - - - -
3.2 Research design - - - -
3.3 Sources/methods of data collection - -
3.4 population and Sample size - - -
3.5 Sampling Techniques - - -
3.6 Validity and reliability of measuring instrument -
3.7 Method of data analysis - - -
Chapter Four
4.0 Presentation and analysis of data - -
4.1 Introduction - - - -
4.2 Presentation of Data- - - -
4.3 Analysis of Data - - - -
4.4 Interpretation of results - - -
Chapter Five
5.0 Summary, Conclusion and Recommendation -
5.1 Introduction - - - -
5.2 Summary of findings - - -
5.3 Conclusion - - - -
5.4 Recommendation - - - -
References - - - -
Appendix - - - - -
Questionnaire - - - -
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Democracy is not all about electoral process but then, we cannot deny the fact that excellent electoral process defines true democracy. That is one of the defining hallmarks of democracy, the opportunity it provides inhabitants of a geopolitical space to periodically refresh its governance system with new operators and ideas. Elections make it possible for the electorate to choose between alternative ideologies, political parties and candidate in a way and manner that gives the majority its way but also guarantees that the minority have their say. It imposes accountability on the elected officials because they know that if they fail to keep their electoral promises on which basis they were voted into power, they risk the vote at the next elections.
The management of elections occupies a significant and strategic position in the enthronement of a democratic order. Particularly, as the centrality of elections to liberal democratic politics presupposes the existence of impartial election administration.
Indeed, the indeterminacy of elections, that is, “the possibility of erstwhile winners becoming losers and erstwhile losers becoming winners-which is an inherent and necessary prerequisite of liberal democratic politics is to a large extent a function of an impartial administration of elections” (Jinadu: 1997). In contrast with the foregoing however, the process of election administration in Nigeria has generated a lot of controversy. It is in realization of the controversial and problematic nature of election administration in Nigeria; particularly the 2007 presidential elections administration that the Umar Musa Yar’Adua administration set up an Electoral Reform Committee (ERC) as soon as it came to power kin 2007 to: “examine the entire process with a view to ensuring that we raise the quality and standard of our general elections and thereby deepen our democracy” (The report to the Electoral Reform Committee ERC: 2008).
While the sustainability of democracy in Nigeria continues to be complicated by several reports of malfeasance in the electoral administrative process, the implication of Nigeria’s history of election administration for the enthronement of a democratic order is yet to be critically and exhaustively explored. By critically examining the location of elections in liberal democratic theory, this study is an examination of the state electoral commissions and development of democracy in Nigeria.
1.1 BACKGROUND OF STUDY
Imo State Independent Electoral Commission (ISIEC) was established by Imo State Law No. 14 of 2000 ISEIEC as a constitutional creation drives it existence and powers also from the 1999 constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria. The ISIEC took off with the swearing in of its chairman and members on 18th December 2000 by His Excellency, the Executive Governor of Imo State, Owelle Rochas Okorocha and has since through hard work, ingenuity and perseverance performed its constitutional duties effectively.
At inception, ISIEC operated for a short while from the Multipurpose Hall Owerri until its present office allocated to kit. ISIEC has conducted bye-elections to fill vacancies at the councillorship level in July 2000. New Wards were also delineated which were approved by the House of Assembly bringing the total ward structure in the state to four hundred and nineteen (419). ISIEC conducted plebiscite in some Autonomous Communities in the State and have recently conducted referendum for the newly created Local Governments.
ISIEC as stakeholder in the state to preserve our nascent democracy has the assemblage of credible men and women as staff who are working harmoniously with registered political parties in the State to ensure a smooth conduct of council elections.
The ISIEC has maintained an open policy to all journalists in the State and fundamental aim of that policy is to prevent communication gap between it and the journalist as well as other stakeholders in the policy.
1.2 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
All the beautiful attributes of what the electoral process should mean for a democratic society cannot be associated with Nigeria. Nigerian electoral history has not been a pleasant one. Nigerians have participated in many elections, beginning with the colonial era when the concept of elections was first introduced. The electorate has also grown from about 5, 0000 adults with 100, pounds sterling income per annum as qualification to be eligible to vote, to over 70million voters of 18 years of age and above. Elective posts have also increased tremendously and electoral referees have also changed from being members of the colonial service whose electoral duties were part tune assignments to being members of an independent electoral commission on full time employment. Yet, since its attainment of independence in 1960, Nigeria has been bedeviled by political instability fueled largely by an electoral process in crisis. The country and her leaders have refused to learn from history and avoid the pitfalls of past mistakes in order to pave the pathway for secure political future. Rather, they have continued to perpetuate the worst forms of our political processes characterized by ugly incidents of political thuggery and violence electoral malpractices both at political party level and general elections, unending law suit crisis of legitimacy, instability and chaos.
Over the period of Nigeria’s existence as an independent nation-state, all these negative attributes of her political processes have often provided compelling reasons for military adventurists to seize power from its civilian collaborators. Without any fear of contradiction, the problems associated with the first post independence, national election of 1964 and the 1965 Western Region election culminated the January 15, 1966 coup. The former was characterized by wide spread rigging intimidation and chaos that some of the major political parties decided to boycott the election, creating in its aftermath serious constitutional dilemma. The latter election of the Western Region was also marred by the problem of ,massive rigging and other irregularities plus wide spread violence, giving the impetus for the first military coup in Nigeria and the culture of instability that was to beset the country for over three decades.
Other elections that have taken in Nigeria after the 1964 and 1965 elections have not fared better. The 1979 elections that saw emergence of Mallam Shehu Shagari as civilian president was criticized by international observers as having been massively rigged. The 1983 election, four years later was even worse, marred by corruption, political violence and polling irregularities. It provided another set of military adventures the impetus to seize power on December 31, 1983. Citing electoral malpractices as one, of its reasons for overthrowing the civilian government. The 1999, 2003 and 2007 elections, three elections conducted during this period of ten years of Nigeria’s democracy have been lampooned by many critics far free and fair. In fact, the last general election of April 2007, conducted by the existing current electoral body, Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has been described as the worst electing ever held in this country as a result of indescribable irregularities which marred the elections.
1.3 RESEARCH QUESTION
1. is the franchise restricted or universally in Nigeria?
2. Are there adequate provision made by the electoral commission to conduct election in such a manner to guarantee free and fair election?
3. Is there freedom of expression?
4. Does the electoral commission ensure democracy in the electoral process?
1.4 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
1. To know whether the franchise is restrained or universally in Nigeria
2. To ascertain if adequate are being made in such a manner to guarantee free and fair election kin Nigeria.
3. To know if there is freedom of expression in the electoral process.
4. To investigate if the electoral commission ensures democracy in the electoral process.
1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The significance of the study such as this cannot be overemphasized considering the need for democracy and sound electoral process in Nigeria. However, this study would improve in their task to conduct credible election in Nigeria.
Finally, the findings of this study would be of interest to further researchers who may wish to conduct further research on this issue.
1.6 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
This study is designed to ascertain whether or not have the electoral commission contributed to the development of democracy in Nigeria. The study will equally look into the historical development of election and electoral development of election and electoral development min Nigeria from the colonial period down to this present dispensation.
1.7 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
The limitations of this study lie in the under listed constraints:
a. There were insufficient journals and textbooks on this topic lead to information that subsequently affected the literature review. However, the researcher made use of the available ones.
b. There was non-existence of already made research work on this topic hence the researcher encountered difficulties in the course of carrying out this research work.
c. Time and duration of this .project work was too short and this adversely the research work.
d. Lack of finance was also one of the limitations faced by the researcher during the time of conducting this research work.
e. Lastly, another major constraint was inadequate co-operation by the respondents which reduced the amount of data collected.
1.8 DEFINITION OF TERMS
Good research ethics demands that terminologies used in this work should be defined in right sense where they are used; therefore, the following terms are hitherto defined as they are used in the study.
STATE: In terms of a political entity, a state is any politically organized community living under a single system of government. States may or may not be sovereign. For instance, federated states are members of a federal union, and may have only partial sovereignty, but are, nonetheless, states. Some states are subject to external sovereignty or hegemony, in which ultimate sovereignty lies in another state. States that are sovereign are known as sovereign states.
THE COMMISSION: This is used in place of the independent national electoral commission (INEC). The body charged with the planning, conducting and supervising of elections in Nigeria.
DEVELOPMENT: This is the process by which INEC, parties, and gains experience, skills to become or remain successful in State Electoral Commission.
DEMOCRACY: This is a system of government in which the citizens exercise power directly or elect representatives from among themselves to form a governing body, such as a parliament. Democracy is sometimes referred to as "rule of the majority". Democracy is a system of processing conflicts in which outcomes depend on what participants do, but no single force controls what occurs and its outcomes.
