Lawyers Seek tougher measures against vote buying

...Blame voters for selling their votes

Some Nigerian lawyers have called for stronger measures to curb vote buying, while also urging voters to take responsibility for willingly exchanging their votes for money, food and other inducements during elections.

The lawyers said vote buying remains a major threat to the credibility of Nigeria’s electoral system, stressing that the practice would be difficult to sustain if voters refused to sell their votes.

They said the fight against electoral inducement should not focus solely on politicians who offer money and other benefits, but must equally address voters who accept such incentives.

An Associate of the Institute of Medical and Health Law and Lead Counsel at Lead, Legal Perspective Consult, Mrs Odinichionye Egwuenu, said the recurring problem of vote buying required a broader discussion about voter consent and the credibility of elections.

Egwuenu said each election cycle was usually accompanied by renewed condemnation of politicians who distributed cash, food, gifts and other items to influence voters.

She, however, noted that the electorate was often left out of the conversation.
“In our eagerness to condemn the buyer, we often overlook an important participant in the transaction; the person who willingly sells the vote.

“This raises an uncomfortable but necessary question: If nobody is willing to sell, who will buy?

“The conversation about vote buying must therefore go beyond the political class. It must also examine the role of the electorate,” she said.

According to her, voters who voluntarily surrender their votes in exchange for financial or material inducements cannot always be regarded solely as victims.

She explained that the Electoral Act also recognised the culpability of voters who corruptly accepted electoral inducements.

Egwuenu stressed that a vote was fundamentally different from an ordinary commercial transaction, saying that the consent of the parties could not legitimise an unlawful electoral exchange.

“A vote is not an ordinary commodity; it is an instrument of political power and a constitutional expression of the citizen’s choice.

“Consequently, consent cannot convert an unlawful electoral transaction into a lawful one.

“Vote is one of the most powerful instruments available to an ordinary Nigerian and once that instrument is sold, the citizen has voluntarily weakened his or her bargaining power with the government,” she said.

She said attention should therefore be given not only to those purchasing votes but also to the circumstances that made voters willing to sell them.

Egwuenu called for effective enforcement of electoral laws alongside sustained voter enlightenment, urging Nigerians to reflect on the question: “If nobody is willing to sell, who will buy?”

Also speaking, a former Chairman of the History and Legacy Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Lagos Branch, Mr Seth Amaefule, said peaceful elections should not automatically be regarded as credible elections.

Amaefule argued that voters who sold their votes had, in effect, surrendered their consciences and their influence over the government they were electing.

“Having sold their conscience and their tomorrow for a need of porridge, they generally do not complain nor protest the outcome of the election.

“Hence, from their perspective, elections are peaceful, though lacking in credibility and this is the actual issue of concern; the credibility of election,” he said.

He maintained that any election in which voters made their choices according to whoever offered the highest financial inducement could not be considered credible.

According to him, leaders who emerge through such a process may lack the moral authority and public confidence required to govern effectively.

Amaefule described vote buying as a major factor contributing to citizens’ declining interest in governance, particularly where elected officials are perceived to have secured office through financial inducement rather than genuine popular support.

On possible solutions, he said legislation alone could not completely eliminate criminal behaviour, as offenders could resort to more covert methods.

He therefore advocated continuous voter education and economic empowerment as complementary measures in the fight against vote buying.

“I believe that adequate voters education, and economic empowerment of the people will help in this regard,” he said.

Similarly, the Publicity Secretary of the Mid-West Bar Forum of the NBA, Mr Lawrence Ayewa, described vote buying as a serious electoral vice that required a comprehensive response.

Ayewa said although vote buying might not necessarily result in violent elections, it significantly undermined the credibility of the electoral process.

“The outcome of such election is automatically influenced by he who has so much money to buy the votes and in Nigeria it has been a practice for a very long time.

“The result is having leaders who have no business leading the country,” he said.

Ayewa called for tougher punishment for politicians found guilty of buying votes, recommending a 14-year jail term for offenders.

He also advocated the same punishment for voters who accept money or other inducements in exchange for their votes.
“I will recommend legal measures that any politician caught buying votes should be jailed for at least 14 years.

“I also recommend that any person who collects the bribe or sells his vote should also be jailed for 14 years,” he said.

The lawyers agreed that tackling vote buying would require more than prosecution and punishment, stressing the need for voter education, economic empowerment, strict enforcement of electoral laws and greater public awareness of the long-term consequences of selling votes.