Winner-takes-all Majoritarian System and Irregularities in Six Election Cycles in Nigeria, 1999 – 2019

Abstract

The argument that Nigerian elections are characterized by electoral irregularities since the commencement of present democratic engagement in 1999 has not been sufficiently subjected to an analytical procedure to embrace the six Nigerian election cycles. Thus, the study investigated this unsettled question to provide insights into how the recurring incidence of irregularities has dominated Nigerian election seasons within the period under review. It situated the problem within the context of the winner-takes-all majoritarian electoral system (MES) and queried the adoption of the MES-driven model, implemented in an environment of do-or-die politics and the 'glorification' of clandestine electoral strategies. It further argued that the model reinforced the use of these strategies by politicians to increase their odds of victory without considering their detrimental consequences. The examination of available documents revealed that the model is consistently implicated in the electoral irregularities that characterized Nigerian elections. It further discovered that the model promoted the crude perception of politics as a zero-sum contest. The present deplorable state of democracy in Nigeria is a function of irregularities and their consequential composites: life-taking elections, election disputes, and voter apathy. These suggest the need for a thorough electoral reform that will throw up a digitally secured electoral system that will be implemented to reflect the various shades of multiethnic cultural Nigerian society. To reduce tension during elections and encourage inclusivity in Nigeria, the reform should be able to institutionalize the electoral commission, check government interference in its activities, reduce the present huge election spending, ensure proportional distribution of votes and positions, and make public offices less financially attractive.

Political Apathy in 2023 General Elections in Nigeria: A Case Study of Enugu State, Nigeria

“…Thus, one can convincingly argue that INEC's claims of reforms have mainly served the purpose of belongingness and receiving assistance from development partners as frequent failures to dispassionately implement its reform objectives have demonstrated. Additionally, considering election preparation, the environment of the election period is one of intense politicking and heightened tension [40], and the deployment of men (both poll officials and security personnel) and materials are done in a fashion akin to a war situation [41]. The environment also depicts an atmosphere of poor democratic orientation on the side of Nigerian politicians who rarely believe in the dual nature of electoral contests: every election inevitably produces either a winner or a loser.…”

“…The environment also depicts an atmosphere of poor democratic orientation on the side of Nigerian politicians who rarely believe in the dual nature of electoral contests: every election inevitably produces either a winner or a loser. This situation is also exacerbated by the notion that access to power guarantees access to state resources, and the lucrative benefits and privileges attached to public offices in the country [40]. Therefore, those who control the Nigerian government are in a firm grip on the INEC and influence its operations to increase their odds of victory in any electoral contests.…”