Edited by Adebayo Adebukola

INCLUSION OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES IN THE CONDUCT OF THE 2015 GENERAL ELECTIONS IN NIGERIA:

ELECTION OBSERVERS REPORT

pg. 2

© Disability Policy and Advocacy Initiative (DPAI) & Lagos State Civil Society Partnership

(LACSOP), July, 2015.

This document may be reproduced in any accessible formats and circulated through any

medium strictly for public use with adequate reference to the Publishers - Disability Policy

and Advocacy Initiative (DPAI), Nigeria and Lagos State Civil Society Partnership

(LACSOP), Nigeria.

No part or whole of this document shall be reproduced for commercial purposes without the

permission of its Publishers, DPAI and LACSOP.

This document may be downloaded from the websites of DPAI, LACSOP and its

Development Partners.

Disclaimer

The content of this document does not represent the views of DFID-SAVI which provided

support for the processes leading to its making and publishing.

The core content of this Report was developed at a 4-day Technical Review and Report

Drafting Session held at the Lagos office of DFID-SAVI, attended by 15 participants (See

Appendix A for full list of participants) and facilitated by Rommy Mom, DFID-SAVI‘s

Federal Programme Manager and Felix Obanubi, DFID-SAVI‘s Lagos State Team Leader

Final compilation and editing of this document was done by Dr.Adebukola Adebayo, Director

General, HORDC and Director, Research &Programmes, Disability Policy Advocacy

Initiative (DPAI).

Graphic design, illustration and photo analysis was provided by AkinolaEmmanuella,

coordinator, Disability Awareness and Development Initiative, and Director of Media and

Publicity, DPAI.

Special review and analysis of relevant local and international election related statutes was

provided by Barrister Daniel Onwe, member and Legal Adviser to DPAI.

Data entry and Statistical computation was provided by KehindeKuforiji, member, LACSOP.

July, 2015.

pg. 3

TABLE OF CONTENT

Preface

Acknowledgement

List of Abbreviations

Executive Summary

Chapter 1: Inclusive Electoral Process in Nigeria: Issues and Perspectives

1.0 Background

1.1 Rationale for Inclusive Electoral Process (right to vote and be voted for)

1.2 Problems of Electoral Inclusion and Accessibility in Nigeria

1.3 Characteristics of Inclusive Elections

1.4 Stakeholders in the Conduct of Inclusive and Accessible Electoral Process

1.4.1 Political Parties

1.4.2 Civil Society Organizations CSOs

1.4.3 POLICE/SECURITY

1.4.4 MEDIA

1.4.5. National and State Legislatures

1.4.6. Election Management Bodies EMBs

1.5 Advocacy for Inclusive and Accessible 2015 General Elections

Chapter 2- International Regional and State laws on inclusive policies

2.0 Introduction

2.1 Electoral Laws and Experiences in Inclusive Elections: 1977 to 2010

2.2 INEC Strategic Programme of Action 2012-2016

2.3 Provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria for the

Conduct of Inclusive and Accessible Electoral Process

2.4 Contributions of State Disability Laws to the conduct of Inclusive and Accessible

Electoral Process in Nigeria

pg. 4

2.4.1 Ekiti State Rights of Persons with Disabilities Law 2013

2.4.2 Lagos State Special Peoples Law, 2011

2.5 Contributions of International Statutes to the conduct of Inclusive and Accessible

Electoral Process in Nigeria

2.5.1 The African Charter on Human and Peoples Right (ACHPR)

2.5.2 United Nations Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD)

2.6 Summary

Chapter 3- Descriptive Analyses of Activities during and After the 2015 General

Election

3.0 Introduction

3.1 Pre-election

3.2 During election

3.2.1 Presidential and National Assembly Elections

3.2.2 Gubernatorial and State Assemblies Elections

3.3 Post Election

3.4 Summary

Chapter 4- Quantitative Analysis of Observations from the 2015 General Elections

4.0 Introduction

4.1 Methodology

4.1.1 Design

4.1.2 Population

4.1.3 Sample Size and Sampling Method

4.1.4 Methods of Observation, Data Collection and Analysis

4.1.5 Limitations

4.2 States-by-State Presentation and Analysis of Data

4.2.1 General Summary

4.3 Zonal Analysis

4.3.1 General Summary

pg. 5

Chapter 5- Major Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations

5.1 Major Findings

5.2 Conclusion

5.3 Recommendations

5.3.1 The Role of Media Organizations

5.3.2 The Role of Security Agencies

5.3.3 The Role of National and State Legislatures

5.3.4 The Role of Local and International Development Agencies

5.3.5 The Role of Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)

5.3.6 The Role of Political Parties

Appendix A- Attendance List for a 4-Day Review Session on 2015 General Election

Appendix B- Monitoring Checklist on Inclusive Electoral Process

Appendix C- Mandate Protection Factsheet

Appendix D–Voter and Civic Education Leaflet

pg. 6

PREFACE

The resolution by DPAI and LACSOP to embark on the observation of the 2015 general

elections was born out of the need to sustain its advocacy for inclusive and accessible

electoral process for persons with disabilities (PWDs) in Nigeria which it commenced in

January 2014.

One key outcome of the DPAI and LACSOP advocacy in 2014 was the first ever production

of a Monitoring Checklist on Inclusive Electoral Process in Nigeria. The draft of the

Monitoring Checklist was presented to the Chairman and Management of the Independent

National Electoral Commission (INEC) for its input on July 22nd

2014. The Draft Monitoring

Checklist was also validated by other stakeholders including disability groups, the media,

political parties and other mainstream CSOs at a Meeting held in Abuja on 14th

November,

2014 with the support of DFID-SAVI, International Republican Institute (IRI) and the

National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). Following INEC‘s pledge to adopt the

Checklist, copies were forwarded to the INEC Head Quarters and same were deployed to all

its state offices across Nigeria. INEC also used the Checklist for the training of its staff in

preparation for the 2015 general elections.1,2

Further engagements of DPAI and LACSOP with INEC before the general elections also lead

to the first ever production of voter and civic education materials including media jingles in

formats accessible to the deaf and the blind persons in Lagos and across the country. INEC

also ensured the PWDs were adequately represented and provided for at all it‘s public and

citizens‘ consultative forum and programmes. Most significantly, INEC announced its

implementation of a policy on ―Priority Voting‖ which provided that voters with disabilities,

elderly voters and pregnant women be given priority attention during voter registration,

accreditation and voting.

Accordingly, it would only be apt to expect that these interventions would make substantial

positive impacts on the conduct of the general elections. Based on this expectation, DPAI and

LACSOP collaborated with Transition Monitoring Group (TMG) to deploy the Monitoring

Checklist for the observation of the 2015 general elections in 10 states, spread across 5 geo-

political zones in Nigeria.

This book, therefore, is a compilation of DPAI and LACSOP‘s reports which emanated from

the observation of the Presidential, National Assembly, Gubernatorial and State Assembly

elections in 2015. The five chapters in the book was developed at a four-day Technical

Review Session on the Observation of the 2015 General Election; facilitated by Rommy

Mom, DFID-SAVI‘s Federal Programme Manager and Felix Obanubi, DFID-SAVI‘s State

Team Leader in Lagos State; held at the SAVI-Lagos office on 5th

to 8th

May, 2015.

This five-chapter publication, documents critical issues, perspectives, rationale, challenges

and stakeholders inclusive electoral process in its first chapter. The chapter also highlights

key advocacy strategies adopted by DPAI and LACSOP as well as the major outcomes

attained there from.

1 This statement is credited to a senior staff of INEC in Lagos who reported that “INEC received copies of the

Monitoring Checklist and has deployed same during training of adhoc and permanent staff…”

2Reports were also received from Anambra state of INEC’s receipt of the Monitoring Checklist and its use for

training activities.

pg. 7

The book reviews major local and international legislative and policy documents and

frameworks in the second chapter with a view to identifying the scope and effectiveness of

provisions contained thereof to promote inclusivity and accessibility needs of PWDs.

However, in the third and fourth chapters, the book presents both narrative and quantitative

analysis of observations from the 2015 general elections.

The fifth and final chapter presents major findings from the observation exercise. The chapter

also draws critical conclusions on the prospects of inclusive electoral process in Nigeria;

while strategic recommendations targeting key stakeholders are enumerated.

Finally, the import and relevance of this book to the conduct of further advocacies and

awareness rising on issues of inclusive and accessible elections to PWDs cannot be

underestimated. It will also serve as a very strategic referential tool for stakeholders involved

in all aspects of designing, developing, planning, implementing, monitoring and evaluating

inclusive electoral process within and beyond Nigeria.

pg. 8

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

DPAI and LACSOP acknowledge and appreciate the tremendous contributions of civil

society partners across the 10 states that made huge sacrifice of time and other resources to

observe the inclusion, access and participation of persons with disabilities and other

vulnerable citizens in the 2015 general elections. We note with utmost regard, the

demonstration of understanding, creativity and ingenuity by all Observers despite obvious

technical and administrative shortcomings in the planning of the exercise.

We appreciate in particular, all CSO partners who directly contributed towards the

development of this Report during the 4-day Review and Report Development Meeting held

after the general elections in the Lagos office of DFID-SAVI between 5th

and 8th

May, 2015.

We sincerely appreciate all members of DPAI, LACSOP, JONAPWD, other CSO partners

and individuals who sacrificed time and intellect to initiate the entire advocacy project on

inclusive and accessible electoral process in Nigeria since January, 2014 when the desk

review was conducted in Lagos; the Southwest Stakeholders Validation Forum held on 12th

May 2014 in Ibadan; the National Stakeholders Review and Validation Forum held on 14th

November, 2014 in FCT Abuja; and the several planning meetings for the election

observation exercise.

We also express our sincere appreciation to all media organizations, Journalists and other

media practitioners who participated at the media dialogue held in May, 2014 and for

providing the media space for public awareness on issues of inclusive electoral process in

Nigeria.

We acknowledge the cooperation, support and partnership relationship provided by the state

and national offices of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) all through

the processes of the DPAI and LACSOP-lead advocacy on inclusive and accessible electoral

process in Nigeria. In particular, we appreciate INEC‘s nationwide adoption and use of the

Monitoring Checklist developed by DPAI and LACSOP; the support by the Lagos state

office of INEC for the production of the campaign posters on Priority Voting which was

designed by DPAI and LACSOP; as well as INEC‘s very responsive attitude towards ideas,

proposals and recommendations emanating from the entire advocacy process.

Finally, we express our profound gratitude to all the International Development Agencies

especially the Lagos and National offices of State Accountability and Voice Initiative (SAVI)

of the DFID and International Republican Institute (IRI) for the support they provided for the

entire advocacy process since January, 2014 to date, including the production of the

Monitoring Checklist and the observation exercise. We also acknowledge the support from

the International Republican Institute (IRI) in the production of the Monitoring Checklist and

the observation exercise.

pg. 9

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ACHPR: African Charter on Human and Peoples Right

ADA: Americans with Disabilities Act

CSOs: Civil Society Organizations

DDB: Disability Data-Base

DFID: Department for International Development

DPAI: Disability Policy and Advocacy Initiative

DPOs: Disabled People's Organizations

EMB: Election Management Body

HORDC: Human and Organizational Resources Development Centre

INEC: Independent National Electoral Commission

IDP: International Development Partners

IFES: International Foundation for Electoral Systems

IRI: International Republican Institute

JONAPWD: Joint National Association of Persons with Disabilities

LACSOP: Lagos State Civil Society Partnership

LGA: Local Government Area

NBC: Nigerian Broadcasting Commission

NDI: National Democratic Institute

NHRC: National Human Rights Commission

OCV: Out of Country Voting

PWDs: Persons with Disabilities

PU: Polling Unit

SAVI: State Accountability and Voice Initiative

SIEC: State Independent Electoral Commission

TMG: Transition Monitoring Group

UK: United Kingdom

pg. 10

UNCRPD: United Nations Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities

U.S: United States

VCEC: Voter and Civic Education and Communication

WHO: World Health Organization

pg. 11

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Elections are the hallmark of every representative democracy and it is required that every

eligible citizen participate equally and effectively in the process. The exclusion of any section

of the citizenry will not only amount to the breach of their fundamental rights, but will also

reduce the legitimacy and acceptability of any government which emerges from such process.

A critical review of Nigeria's democratic history especially since 1999 reveals a near total

exclusion of persons with disabilities (PWDs) from all aspects of the electoral process. In

spite of relevant provisions made by the 1999 Constitution, the 2010 Electoral Act and other

legislative and policy instruments, the inclusion and participation of PWDs in the electoral

process has been very marginal; basically limited to vote casting devoid of secrecy and

independence as prescribed by law and as enjoyed by other non-disabled citizens.

In 2014, the Lagos State Civil Society Partnership (LACSOP), the umbrella body for all

network of CSOs in Lagos State in partnership with Disability Policy and Advocacy Initiative

(DPAI) both supported by DFID‘s State Accountability and Voice Initiative (SAVI), IRI and

NHRC, considered it apt and timely to make a strategic intervention to conduct an advocacy

with critical stakeholders especially the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)

on possibilities of ensuring increased and improved participation of PWDs in the 2015

general elections.

The climax of these advocacies was the conduct of observation of the general elections in 10

states spread across 5 geo-political zones in Nigeria using a Monitoring Checklist which was

also developed in the course of the advocacies. The outcome of the election observation

which is contained in this book was harmonized and analysed at a 4-day Technical Review

Session held between 5th

and 8th

May, 2015 at the Lagos office of DFID-SAVI.

Based on the observation of the 2015 general elections conducted in 10 states across 5 geo-

political zones in Nigeria, and the outcome of desk review of relevant literature, the following

constitute major findings which should be considered for action:

(a) Existing electoral legislative and policy frameworks including the 1999 Constitution,

the Electoral Act 2010 and INEC‘s Strategic Plan for 2012-2016 are found to be

grossly insufficient and incapable of effectively promoting inclusive and accessible

electoral process in Nigeria.

(b) As observed in the 2015 general elections, the level of public awareness and

enlightenment on issues of inclusive electoral process in Nigeria is only fairly high.

However, it is grossly insufficient to elicit appropriate positive attitude and response

of the general public towards issues of inclusive electoral process.

(c) There is inadequate attention, contribution and commitment of relevant scholars,

professionals, development agencies and other stakeholders towards research and

development of inclusive electoral process in Nigeria.

(d) There is general lack of technical capacity on the part of EMBs, political parties, the

media, the Legislature, security agencies, CSOs and DPOs, as well as PWDs

themselves on issues and practices in inclusive electoral process.

(e) There is no disability data base (DDB) with regard to management and administrative

logistics and planning for the implementation of inclusive electoral process.

pg. 12

(f) The fairly high turn-out of voters with disabilities, elderly voters and women

(including pregnant women) in the 2015 general elections demonstrate their

willingness and capacity to effectively participate in an inclusive and accessible

electoral process once all technical, institutional, human and infrastructural

requirements are met.

(g) Implementation of INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting‖ is encouraging going by the

level of compliance observed. However, some observed trends suggest that this is not

sufficient to guaranty an inclusive electoral process.

(h) Observations reveal that the level of accessibility to polling units, electoral/voting

materials such as ballot papers for the blind; sing language interpretation for the deaf;

physical access for the physically challenged and simplified information for the

intellectually disabled are still very far-fetched in the attainment of inclusive and

accessible electoral process in Nigeria.

(i) It was observed that political parties, the media, and mainstream CSOs lack capacity

and courage to support interested PWDs to stand for elections at any level.

(j) It was also observed that the level of violence before, during and after elections as

well as intimidation by security officials are still significantly high to discourage

effective participation of PWDs, the elderly and women in the political process

In view of these findings, the following are some of the key recommendations proposed in

this Report:

(a) Actors in the media sector including regulators, media organizations and professionals

should give adequate attention, resources, support and commitment towards

promoting inclusion of PWDs in the electoral process.

(b) Security agencies and their officials should be properly trained to secure the electoral

process; exhibiting democratic attitudes and skills; and providing necessary support to

vulnerable voters including those with disabilities.

(c) National and state Legislatures should be enlightened on the need to enact disability

and gender-inclusive electoral laws, while also making sufficient financial

appropriation to provide for institutional and infrastructural requirements for the

conduct of inclusive elections.

(d) Local and International Development Agencies should institute policies and

programmes which promote inclusion and access for PWDs and other vulnerable

voters. It is also important that they draw funding conditions which compel EMBs,

political parties, the media and other stakeholders to make room for inclusion of

PWDs.

(e) EMBs (INEC and SIECs) should develop and implement disability-inclusive electoral

policies and programmes. They should also include disability-inclusion in all their

guidelines and other regulatory documents to compel other electoral actors to

mainstream inclusive behaviours. It is also important that EMBs do more to

effectively engage with PWDs and DPOs.

(f) Political parties should develop and implement disability-inclusion policies and

programmes; give quotas to PWDS interested in running for elective positions; as

well as employ qualified PWDs in their offices.

(g) CSOs should support citizens to develop more responsive attitudes towards PWDs

before, during and after elections. They should also mainstream disability issues in

their engagements with other electoral stakeholders.

pg. 13

Chapter 1

INCLUSIVE ELECTORAL PROCESS IN NIGERIA: ISSUES AND

PERSPECTIVES

1.0 Background

Elections are the hallmark of every representative democracy and it is required that every

eligible citizen participate equally and effectively in the process. The exclusion of any section

of the citizenry will not only amount to the breach of their fundamental rights, but will also

reduce the legitimacy and acceptability of any government which emerges from such process.

A critical review of Nigeria's democratic history especially since 1999 reveals a near total

exclusion of persons with disabilities (PWDs) from all aspects of the electoral process. In

spite of relevant provisions made by the 1999 Constitution, the 2010 Electoral Act and other

legislative and policy instruments, the inclusion and participation of PWDs in the electoral

process has been very marginal; basically limited to vote casting devoid of secrecy and

independence as prescribed by law and as enjoyed by other non-disabled citizens.

Since 1999, Nigeria‘s electoral process has been conducted in such a way that significantly

excludes vulnerable citizens especially PWDs. Not only are election laws and institutions

designed in such ways that limit the inclusions of PWDs, physical and social inclusion and

access are virtually denied. There are also poor and ineffective engagements between

Disabled People‘s Organizations (DPOs) and key stakeholders especially the mainstream

Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and the media in promoting issues of disability in the

electoral process.

Several attempts to reform the electoral process in 2001, 2006 and 2010 have resulted in little

or no improvements in the inclusion and access of PWDs to effectively participate in the

electoral process. However, since 2012, stakeholders including DPOs, CSOs and

International Development Partners (IDPs) have made tremendous efforts to take advantage

of on-going review of the 1999 Constitution and other socio-political reforms processes to

renew vigorous advocacies for the reform of the electoral process to enhance its inclusivity

and accessibility to PWDs.

In 2014, the Lagos State Civil Society Partnership (LACSOP), the umbrella body for all

network of CSOs in Lagos State in partnership with Disability Policy and Advocacy Initiative

(DPAI) both supported by DFID‘s State Accountability and Voice Initiative (SAVI) and IRI

considered it apt and timely to make a strategic intervention to conduct an advocacy with

critical stakeholders especially the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on

possibilities of ensuring increased and improved participation of PWDs in the 2015 general

elections.

1.1 Rationale for Inclusive Electoral Process (right to vote and be voted for)

The electoral process is one of the key pillars of any democratic system; this is because it

provides opportunity for every adult citizen to participate directly or indirectly in the

government and governance of the society at local, national and international levels. Through

elections, citizens are able to vote (elect or select) their representatives in government.

pg. 14

According to the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES, 2014), Elections

provide a unique opportunity to increase participation and change public perceptions about

the abilities of persons with disabilities. As a result, persons with disabilities can have a

stronger political voice and be increasingly recognized as equal citizens. This sets the stage

for on-going participation in their communities and social and economic integration.3

Involvement empowers persons with disabilities and positively shapes the political process

and democratization outcomes. It is therefore important to engage persons with disabilities

from the outset of program design. This ensures that persons with disabilities are also equal

partners who have a voice in decisions that affect their lives.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) serves

as the international guiding framework for the implementation of inclusive electoral process

and provides the legal basis and a set of standards for the full and equal participation of

persons with disabilities in public life. Articles 29 and 12 are particularly relevant for

election-related activities. Details of this are discussed in the next chapter.

The electoral process consist of series of interrelated activities beginning from the enactment

of relevant electoral laws, policies and regulations; the establishment of the Election

Management Body (EMB); determining and planning for election dates, venues and time;

hiring and training of ad-hoc and permanent electoral officials; conduct of voters and civic

education on election; designing and deployment of election materials; conduct of voting;

counting of ballot; declaration of winners and settling of election disputes; preparation and

conduct of election monitoring; and, review and evaluation of conducted elections.

All these activities are expected to comply with all relevant local, national and international

legal and policy instruments which seek to guarantee that the electoral process must be

peaceful, free and fair. These instruments also provide that the electoral process should

guarantee equal access to, and participation of all citizens irrespective of their social, cultural,

and economic and disability status.

On the contrary, according to several studies, most electoral processes fall short of these

ethical and legal requirements especially the guaranteeing and enhancing of access and

participation of all adult citizens. The most electorally excluded section of the population has

been found to be largely made up of persons with various disabilities.

Persons with disabilities (PWDs) in all countries of the world suffer various forms of

electoral accessibility challenges, deliberately and/or ignorantly created by local and national

legal and policy instruments such as constitutions, electoral laws and other policy and

regulatory frameworks issued by EMBs.

Exclusion of PWDs from, and their inadequate access and participation in the electoral

process manifest in forms ranging from little or no consultation in the development of

electoral laws, policies and regulations; exclusion from participating in the administration of

EMBs; exclusion from the processes of designing and planning of election logistics including

voting materials, voting venues, etc; little or no involvement in the training of election

officials; little or no access to election and political media information; inaccessible ballot

3 The International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) (2014); Equal Access: How to include Persons

with Disabilities in Electoral and Political Processes. www.IFES.org

pg. 15

papers and voting machines, voting centres, etc; and exclusion

from election monitoring activities.

1.2 Problems of Electoral Inclusion and Accessibility in Nigeria

In spite of Nigeria‘s commitment to several relevant international conventions such as

UNCRPD, and the provisions made by the 1999 Constitution and the Electoral Act, 2010, the

Nigerian EMB, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is yet to establish a

truly inclusive and accessible electoral process. Since 1999, only very few PWDs have had

marginal participation; basically at the voting stages of elections. Most PWDs are completely

excluded from all aspects of the process.

1. Low Institutional Capacity:

Although INEC recently established designated Desks nationwide on

disability and inclusion matters to guide and ensure compliance with relevant

laws and policies. Observations reveal that most of the officers managing this

Desks are not persons with disabilities and lack adequate capacity to engage

with PWDs;

INEC does not currently have any data-base on population of Nigerians with

disabilities. INEC‘s voters registration process is not sensitive and adapted to

nature of disabilities;

INEC‘s permanent and ad-hoc staff lack the capacity to engage effectively

with PWDs in all stages of the electoral process.

2. Exclusion from Citizens Engagements on Election Matters:

There is no adequate inclusion of PWDs by INEC when conducting citizens

consultations on election matters;

Children and youths with disabilities are not effectively provided for in the

development and application of electoral and civic educational materials;

Citizens with disabilities are not usually effectively considered and captured

when preparing and disseminating electoral information and communication

materials.

3. Inaccessibility and Restriction of PWDs:

Picture: A polling unit sited in front of an open ditch which inhibits access to physically challenged persons.

pg. 16

Inaccessible polling centres for wheel chair users, lack of Braille ballots for

the blind, lack of sign language support for deaf persons and lack of provision

for persons with limb loss;

Inaccessible political parties' ads and campaign materials.

4. Exclusion from Election Monitoring and other Allied Matters

DPOs and PWDs have never had opportunity to participate in election

monitoring activities in Nigeria due to inadequate awareness on the part of

INEC, civil society groups and other stakeholders;

PWDs have been largely excluded from participating in political party

activities;

Civil society groups advocating for electoral reforms have excluded issues

affecting PWDs. There hasn‘t been remarkable engagements between

mainstream CSOs and DPOs on the need for inclusive electoral process in

Nigeria;

Since 1999, international and local development partners have not given

significant considerations to supporting DPOs and PWDs in their quest for

inclusive electoral process in Nigeria. Few efforts in the past have failed due

to poor follow-up programmes and the failure to secure adequate commitment

from INEC.

1.3 Characteristics of Inclusive Elections

Inclusion is the acceptance of all people regardless of their differences. It is about

appreciating people for who they are because even though we are all different, we are one.

Inclusion allows people to value differences in each other by recognizing that each person has

an important contribution to make to our society.4

As a social principle, inclusion presupposes that everyone is considered, consulted, involved,

has access to and participating in all social, economic and political processes, systems,

institutions at an equal level irrespective of status.

As an attitude or behaviour, inclusion becomes internalized by individuals as their way of life

or culture. It becomes an ethical code of conduct or principle which guides daily and every

activity especially when it is reinforced by legal, policy and institutional guides and practices.

According to Stuart Schleien, Fredrick Green, and Charlsena Stone, ―the concept of inclusion

is a continuum of three levels of acceptance ranging from a physical level to a social level.

Social inclusion, the final and highest level can be achieved only after the first two levels of

inclusion have been met.‖5

4Shafik Abu-Tahir as cited in Dattilo, 2002, p. 26

5Stuart Schleien, Fredrick Green, and Charlsena Stone (1999) Levels of Inclusion;

www.indiana.edu/~nca/leisureed/inclusion2.html

pg. 17

Inclusion: A Continuum of Acceptance

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

Physical Integration Functional Inclusion Social Inclusion

An individual with

disability has the

right to access

public buildings

and facilities

including polling

centres.

He/she should have

unhindered access

to voting materials

including ballot

papers and boxes.

He/she should have

unhindered access

to all electoral

public information.

An individual with disability should

have a sense of fulfilment and the

opportunity to be successful within a

given environment. This may be

manifested in:

Participating in election

management activities;

Participate in all citizens

engagements including

consultations with EMBs;

Voting freely,

independently and with

utmost secrecy as required

by law;

Participating in election

monitoring; and

Participating in all manner

of lawful political activities.

Inclusion rooted in laws and

policies can only achieve

limited (legalistic and

institutional) compliance.

One's ability to participate in

positive social interactions

facilitated through electoral

and political activities is

internally motivated and it is

only by embracing inclusion as

a value that this level can be

achieved.

Social inclusion cannot be

mandated.6

Democracy becomes fully participatory only when there is equal, free and fair opportunity for

all citizens to participate in the social, economic and political space. According to Open Idea,

"Democracy (participatory governance) is either direct or indirect. Direct means holding

elected positions while indirect is by voting which is facilitated by inclusive elections -

involving and facilitating all, through the entire electoral process. Democracy - Participatory

governance: Inclusive elections explain globally that democracy means involving all in

decision making. It further states that participatory governance is either direct (when people

hold elected positions) or indirect when people vote those in power. For elections to be

inclusive all strata of populations must be involved in the electoral phases and the system in

place must ensure all measures are put in place (assistive technologies, transportation means

etc.) to facilitate the involvement of every eligible voter (irrespective of geography, ability or

disorders - hearing, visual, cognitive/language, physical, seizure and multiple impairments;

aged, mobile personnel as soldiers etc.) to partake in the electoral process."7

Exclusion of PWDs from electoral process manifest in various forms, ranging from;

little or no consultation in the development of electoral laws, policies and regulations,

and their inadequate to access and participate in the election

exclusion from participating in the administration of EMBs (Election Monitoring

Board), exclusion from the processes of designing and planning of election logistics

including voting materials, voting venues, etc;

6 Adapted from: www.indiana.edu/~nca/leisureed/inclusion2.html

7International Disability Alliance contribution to OHCHR Thematic Study on "The participation of persons with

disabilities in political and public life" www.openideo.com/challenge/voting/inspiration/democracy-

participatory-governance-inclusive-elections.

pg. 18

little or no involvement in the training of election officials

little or no access to election and political media information

inaccessible ballot papers and voting machines, voting centres, etc;

Exclusion from election monitoring activities.

1.4 Stakeholders in the Conduct of Inclusive and Accessible Electoral Process

Virtually every actor in the political and democratic space has roles to play in ensuring that

the process is as inclusive and accessible as possible. In conducting this advocacy, DPAI and

LACSOP identified and reviewed the roles of some state and non-state actors.

1.4.1 Political Parties

As effective instrument of political mobilization, interest aggregation and articulation as well

as indispensable channel of ascending political power, political parties must demonstrate

interest and advance policies that reflect the conglomerate of interest (including those of the

marginalized groups) in society.

Political parties in Nigeria have paid limited attention to the imperative of enunciating

constitutional provision on the rights and privileges of the marginalized groups and strategic

Picture 1: A persons with visual impairment standing behind electoral officers to observe

proceeding at a polling unit.

pg. 19

policies and programmes in their manifestos. Besides this documentary policy initiative,

political parties have also substantially failed to develop pragmatic strategy on the

mainstreaming of PWDs in the structures and processes.

Such strategy must include creation of Disability Desks in Party Secretariats/offices, ensure

accessibility to the offices, include representation of PWDs in the decision-making organs

and grant special waivers for aspiring PWDs on becoming candidates of the party. Other

measures needed are strategy for recruitment and retention of PWD members and a data base

of members for easy and prompt mobilization. Political Parties are also expected to ensure

their internal and external communication are conducted in easily readable formats e.g., use

of simple languages, Braille or tactile and sign language interpretation. These inadequacies

have limited the ability of PWDs to participate effectively in political parties‘ activities and

thereby deprive them the electoral opportunities it bestows.

1.4.2 Civil Society Organizations CSOs

CSOs, particularly those working in the field of disabilities have in no small measure

influenced the 2015 elections. Many of such organisations at different locations have

engaged in advocacy for more inclusion of persons with disabilities in the electoral process.

For instance, Disability Policy and Advocacy Initiative (DPAI) in collaboration with the

Lagos State Civil Society Partnership (LACSOP) and with the support of the DFID State

Accountability & Voice Initiative (SAVI) developed the checklist for monitoring elections to

ensure inclusiveness. This Monitoring Checklist was translated to the umbrella body of

Disability CSOs in Nigeria - Joint National Association of Persons with Disabilities

[JONAPWD] for adoption and ownership.

JONAPWD used the Checklist to engage INEC at the national level, while DPAI engaged

INEC at the Lagos State and South-West level. The outcome of these engagements is that the

awareness and sensitivity INEC had towards the participation of persons with disabilities was

heightened in the build up of the 2015 elections. Accordingly INEC took specific steps to

promote the inclusion of persons with disabilities in the elections.

From the state of voter education through the conduct of the elections and announcement of

result, different disability organisations worked collaboratively to make the 2015 election

inclusive. It is on record that Disability Organisations such as DPAI published and circulated

IEC materials encouraging persons with disabilities to get involved in the electoral process,

while calling on the general public to assist persons with disabilities to participate in the

elections. All these are in accordance with INEC priority voting policy. Association of sign

Language Interpreters of Nigeria on their own part worked in collaboration with INEC to

create inclusion and access for the deaf at various voters and civic engagement forum and to

get the elections results interpreted in sign Language. Transition Monitoring Group (TMG)

was also handy to facilitate election monitoring by persons with disabilities and their

organisations.

On the whole, there was a considerable improvement in the activities of CSOs in fostering the

inclusion of persons with disabilities in the electoral process in this present dispensation.

pg. 20

1.4.3 Police/Security

The main role of security agencies during an Election is to maintain order and to create by

means of effective policing, a favourable climate in which a democratic election can take

place.

The Nigeria police in carrying out this role, between 1999-2015, have lacked adequate

capacity to effectively address the regular incidences of violence during electoral process.

What was predominantly the norm can be described as the heavy presence of security

operatives across the polling units in the country, with several artificial road blocks mounted

by heavily armed men and women of the military forces days prior to election days, curfew

or restriction of movements in place in most cases. Security officials are mostly stern looking,

and their rifles in their arms seeming ready to fire.

These unapproachable demeanour will intimidate even the best intending civilian and against

the terms of inclusion which states ―An individual with disability having a sense of fulfilment

and the opportunity to be successful within a given environment.‖ These militarized political

atmosphere impacts negatively on many people especially people with disabilities and other

vulnerable groups. Being self-conscious of their disability and vulnerability, and as a safety

measure, they often stay away from the election, at the heavy cost of not casting their votes,

exercising their franchise and fundamental human right. This was evidenced in the Ekiti and

Osun 2014 gubernatorial elections.

The security agencies can be more effective and consciously inclusive in its duties during

elections and other elections related activities within the context of National Security that has

a high premium for democratic Policing and with due regards to its core values. Towards

future elections starting from 2015, the Civil Society especially stakeholders in inclusive

elections privy to democratic policing advocated for inclusive electoral process among all

stakeholders including the security agencies.

Democratic Policing is a philosophy to guide police management styles, policies, strategies

and operational performance. It is practiced within the following key principles:

Relies upon active partnership between the citizens (community) and the Police;

Ensure that the Security Agencies view their primary role as the provision of quality

service to the community;

Entails that the police adopt a problem solving approach to their work;

Requires that the Police and the National Security and Civil Defence involve the

community in the determination of policing priorities

Having this in mind, democratic policing therefore embraces the following values

(i) Respect for and protection of human rights

(ii) Transparency and openness in relation to activities and relationship within and

outside the security organizations

(iii) Demonstrable commitment at all times to deliver the best possible service

(iv)Willingness to seek, listen to and act upon public opinion relating to policing

priorities

pg. 21

1.4.4 MEDIA

The media, particularly electronic media, play a crucial role in shaping voter interest in, and

attitudes about inclusive election. The way the media portray persons with disability, how

they deal with issues of special concern to PWDs and whether they convey effectual voter

education messages can have a major impact on PWDs participation in an election.

In general, election laws and media laws create a framework for the role of the media in

elections. In reality, however, media regulations and practices may indirectly disadvantage

PWDs when issues that affect them are not understood.

1.4.5. National and State Legislatures

The National and State legislatures have the sole responsibilities to make laws; appropriate

funds and resources as well as conduct oversight over the activities of the executive arm and

all agencies of government including the election management bodies.

As earlier noted, the National Assembly has not fared well enough in its responsibilities to

ensure that the 1999 Constitution and the Electoral Act adequately mainstream and provide

for the needs of PWDs. In fact, it is safe to assume that the National Assembly is generally

less sensitive towards issues of inclusion and disability as far as the electoral process is

concerned.

At the state level, most State Houses of assembly have also done virtually nothing to promote

inclusion in the laws establishing their State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIECs).

However, few states including Lagos and Ekiti have enacted Disability Laws which generally

promote the inclusion of PWDs in the political and electoral processes.

1.4.6 International Development Agencies

These agencies have provided huge support to relevant governmental and nongovernmental

institutions working on the electoral process. The development agencies often enter into

partnership with the election management bodies especially the Independent National

Electoral Commission (INEC) by providing funding and capacity-building.

While these agencies have over the years made efforts to promote inclusion of PWDs, their

interventions have basically focused on supporting CSO advocacies; with very little attention

towards the institutional development and capacity-building of INEC, political parties, the

media, etc. Thus far, no attention and support have been given towards development of

Disability Data Base (DDB) for the electoral process; an aspect which has been identified to

be very critical to all on-going efforts to promote inclusive electoral process. Even where

support is given, development agencies do little to monitor compliance.

1.4.7. Election Management Bodies EMBs

In the Nigerian context, INEC and the SIECs are at the forefront of managing elections at the

national and state levels respectively. Since independence, EMBs in Nigeria generally lack

awareness, as well as the institutional and human capacities to ensure effective inclusion and

access of PWDs in all aspects of the electoral process.

pg. 22

Since the second republic of 1979 up to the pre-AtahiruJega

years of INEC in the current democratic dispensation, no EMB

in Nigeria is noted to have strategically and constructively

engaged PWDs, DPOs and other interested stakeholders on

issues of inclusive and accessible electoral process. For

instance, prior to the DPAI & LACSOP-lead advocacy and

partnership with INEC, no EMB in Nigeria have ever produced

voter and civic education materials including media jingles in

accessible formats for PWDs.

This long years of poor institutional and human capacity on the

part of previous and present EMBs, have been the major

reasons for the persistent exclusion of PWDs from effectively

participating in the electoral process.

1.5 Advocacy for Inclusive and Accessible 2015 General

Elections

The Lagos State Civil Society Partnership (LACSOP), the

umbrella body for all network of CSOs in Lagos State in

partnership with Disability Policy and Advocacy Initiative

(DPAI) with support from DFID‘s State Accountability and

Voice Initiative (SAVI),IRI and NHRC considered it apt and

timely to make a strategic intervention to conduct an advocacy

with critical stakeholders especially the Independent National

Electoral Commission (INEC) on possibilities of ensuring

increased and improved participation of PWDs in the 2015

general elections

The LACSOP/DPAI lead advocacy was initiated with a desk

review and the development of a Monitoring Checklist in

Lagos. The draft report and the checklist were presented for

stakeholders‘ validation at zonal level in Ibadan at the

southwest, and at the national level in Abuja. DPOs, CSOs,

INEC, political parties, the media and international

development partners actively participated at the validation

meetings.

LACSOP and DPAI equally demonstrated the possibility of

producing inclusive and accessible media jingles as well as

civic and voter education materials in Lagos. Here are links to

some of the Inclusive voter and civic education media Jingles:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W23_63Ouyf88

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTnXprT6hqk9

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10HySAI4jSw10

8 Civic and Voter Education Media Jingle produced by DPAI & LACSOP in collaboration with INEC and

Media Partners in November, 2014. 9 Ibid.

10 Ibid.

Picture 2 A sample of the IEC material on priority voting.

Picture 3: A cross section of CSO members at an engagement with INEC.

pg. 23

The key outcome of these engagements included:

Adoption of the monitoring checklist by INEC: At the presentation of the Monitoring

checklist to INEC in its Abuja head quarters on July 22nd

2014. The Chairman pledged

that INEC will adopt the checklist for use during the 2015 general elections.

Conduct of National Conference on Inclusion and Participation of PWDs in the 2015

General Elections: In December, 2014, INEC organized a National Conference to

gather expert views on how to effectively include PWDs in the general elections. At

the Conference, INEC pledged to use knowledge and information obtained to develop

an inclusive electoral policy.

Collaboration between DPAI, LACSOP, INEC and a cross section of media

organizations to produce inclusive and accessible voter and civic education materials:

For the first time in Nigeria, inclusive and accessible formats of voter and civic

education and communications materials in Braille and large print, including sign

interpreted audiovisual media jingles were produced. This was a demonstration

activity with support from the Lagos office of DFID-SAVI intended to encourage

INEC towards taking similar actions. The media organizations aired the media jingles

for several weeks before the elections free of charge.

Invitation of PWDs to various Stakeholders Consultative Meetings: At both national

and state levels, INEC ensured that PWDs were invited to its various stakeholders'

consultative meetings. At these meetings, all INEC‘s civic and voter education

materials were produced in accessible formats while sign interpreters were provided

for the deaf. Most of the events were held in accessible venues for wheelchair users.

INEC Partnered with LACSOP and DPAI to Produce Posters on Priority Voting: In

Lagos State, INEC financially sponsored the production of public enlightenment

posters on priority voting which was produced by LACSOP and DPAI

pg. 24

CHAPTER 2

INTERNATIONAL, REGIONAL, NATIONAL AND STATE LAWS /

POLICIES ON INCLUSIVE ELECTIONS

2.0 Introduction

Despite its importance, the electoral process in Nigeria is still one in which persons with

disabilities suffer exclusion and denial of access to equal participation, albeit tacitly. Though

international instruments such as the CRPD provide for full political participation of PWDs,

the implementation of such provisions would be as specifically stipulated by local

legislations. Unfortunately, successive electoral laws that have been operated ever since the

democratic history of Nigeria have not really been inclusive of PWDs. That is to say that the

electoral laws of Nigeria have been oblivious of the need for the full and equal participation

of Persons with disabilities in the electoral process. Specifically, there are no legal provisions

for the effective participation of persons with disabilities at the different stages of the

electoral process namely, voter registration, voter education, accreditation, collation, result

announcement etc. The mention of disability issues in the successive electoral laws in Nigeria

has always only been in terms of the visually impaired persons been allowed to be assisted to

vote by a third party. This obviously compromises the secrecy and security of the vote of the

affected person. In other words, there is no guarantee that the vote of the visually impaired

voter in question will actually be cast for the candidate of his choice. Even when such votes

are actually cast according to the instruction of the said visually impaired person, the element

of secrecy will be absent.

Government at the various levels as well as the successive election management bodies

treated the participation of persons with disabilities in the electoral process rather as a non-

issue. However, as a result of effective advocacy by disability rights activist and disability

organizations with the support of development partners such as the State Accountability and

Voice Initiative (SAVI) of the DFID, the 2015 general election has become a remarkable

improvement in the inclusion and participation of persons with disabilities on all fronts.

In this chapter, we review provisions of relevant electoral legal and policy frameworks and

considerations with a view to identifying their strengths and weaknesses in ensuring inclusive

and accessible electoral process for PWDs in Nigeria. Due to time, availability and

accessibility of records, we are able to review the Electoral Decree of 1977, Electoral Acts of

1982, 2001, 2002, 2006 and 2010 as amended respectively. The INEC Strategic Plan of 2012

to 2016 is also reviewed to ascertain the level of policy commitment to the inclusion of

PWDs in the electoral process in line with global best practices and the spirit of national

integration as espoused by the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

2.1 Electoral Laws and Experiences in Inclusive Elections: 1977 to 2010

Besides the Constitution, Electoral laws have been the major legal framework for the conduct

of all elections in Nigeria. Specific provisions are made for the composition and conduct of

the election management body, political parties and other stakeholders. Also, the conducts

and participation of citizens, provision of electoral materials and infrastructure, among others

pg. 25

are also provided. For this purpose, we examine some electoral laws which have been

implemented since the 1979 second republic to date.

Section 50 of the electoral Decree, 1977 provides as follows:

“A voter who is blind or is otherwise unable to distinguish

symbols or who suffers any other physical disability may be

accompanied into the polling station by a friend or relative

chosen by him and the friend or relative shall after informing

the presiding officer of the disability be permitted to

accompany the voter into the voting compartment and assist

the voter to make his left thumb mark, on the left side of the

symbol nominated by the voter, to insert the ballot paper in

the envelope and to seal the envelope.”

This was repealed by the Electoral Act of 1982 which repeated the same provision in section

52.

Section 51 of the Electoral Act of 2001 repeated the said provision only with a minor

modification as follows:

“A voter who is blind or is otherwise unable to distinguish

symbols or who suffers any other physical disability may be

accompanied into the polling station by a person chosen by

him and the person shall after informing the Presiding

Officer of the disability, be permitted to accompany the voter

into the voting compartment and assist the voter to make his

mark in accordance with the procedure prescribed by the

Commission.”

This provision was repeated verbatim as section 47 of the Electoral Act, 2002; and section 57

of the Electoral Act 2006. Presently section 56 of the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended)

retains the said provision with only a minute modification as follows:

“A voter who is blind or is otherwise unable to distinguish

symbols or who suffers any other physical disability may be

accompanied into the polling unit by a person chosen by him

and the person shall after informing the Presiding Officer of

the disability, be permitted to accompany the voter into the

voting compartment and assist the voter to make his mark in

accordance with the procedure prescribed by the

Commission.”

Other provisions of the Electoral Act 2010 as amended that could also be of relevance to

effective inclusion and accessibility for PWDs are as follows:

Section 42: The Commission shall establish sufficient number of polling units in each

registration area and shall allot voters to such polling unit.

NOTE: It is important that these polling units be made accessible to PWDs.

pg. 26

Section 43: The Commission shall provide suitable boxes for the conduct of election.

NOTE: The ballot boxes should have brailed inscription to guide the blind.

Section 44: The Commission shall prescribe the format of the ballot papers which shall

include the symbol adopted by the political party of the candidate and such

other information as it may require.

NOTE: Brailed ballot papers would assist the blind to vote independently.

Section 51: Provides that: The Presiding Officer shall separate the queue between men

and women if in that area of the country the culture is such that it does not

permit mingling of men and woman in the same queue.

NOTE: For the purpose of convenience, similar separate queue may be made of PWDs so

that they can be more easily attended to.

Section 56 provides as follows:

“A voter who is blind or is otherwise unable to distinguish

symbols or who suffers any other physical disability may be

accompanied into the polling unit by a person chosen by him

and the person shall after informing the Presiding Officer of

the disability, be permitted to accompany the voter into the

voting compartment and assist the voter to make his mark in

accordance with the procedure prescribed by the

Commission.”

NOTE: Much as this is good, efforts should be made toward a situation where the blind and

other PWDs can be totally independent while voting. Situation where they need to be

accompanied in another to cast their votes makes them susceptible to exploitation.

Nonetheless, within the period 1999 to date, series of elections did hold with marginal

participation of PWDs. Basically, as noted earlier, the provision made for them was limited

to vote casting that was devoid of secrecy and independence. This negates the spirit of

democracy wherein the people are to exercise their franchise in secret without a third party

intervention.

2.2 INEC Strategic Programme of Action 2012-2016

The following objectives, activities and indicators in the INEC Strategic Programme of

Action are considerations upon which the 2014 to 2015 citizens‘ advocacies for inclusive

elections were based:

Objective One: To provide electoral operations, systems and infrastructure to

support delivery of free, fair and credible elections

pg. 27

1.1Objectives: Ensure a good constitutional and legal framework for the conduct of

free, fair and credible elections

Activities: Policies to allow Out of Country Voting (OCV) and voting by marginalized

groups

Indicators: Proposed areas of Constitutional and Electoral Act amendments completed by

Q2 2013.

1.7 Objectives: To provide infrastructure to support delivery of free, fair and credible

elections

Activities: Provision of voting cubicles and infrastructures at all Polling Units for

physically challenged person

Indicators: Contract awarded & completed by Q2 2014

Objective Two: To improve voter education, training and research

2.2 Objectives Formulate and Implement Training Programmes

Activities: Review of election manuals to accommodate persons with disabilities

Indicators: Approval secured by Q1each and training conducted by Feb. 2013, 2014

2.5 Objectives Formulate and implement policies to ensure participation of

marginalized groups including persons with disability as well as Out of

Country Voting (OCV)

Activities: Enhance the participation of Persons Living with Disabilities (PLWD) as well

as Out of Country Voting (OCV) on the electoral process

Indicators: Approval secured for conduct of zonal workshops by Q2 2013, 2014 & Q1

2015

As we shall observe in subsequent chapters, most of these objectives, activities and indicators

were not achieved before and during the conduct of the 2015 general elections. This therefore

hindered the inclusion and participation of PWDs in the electoral process.

2.3 Provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria for the

Conduct of Inclusive and Accessible Electoral Process

Chapter II of the 1999 Nigeria Constitution: Fundamental Objectives and Directive

Principles of State Policy

Section 13. It shall be the duty and responsibility of all organs of government, and of all

authorities and persons, exercising legislative, executive or judicial powers, to

conform to, observe and apply the provisions of this Chapter of this

Constitution.

pg. 28

Section 14. (1) The Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be a State based on the

Principles of democracy and social justice.

(2) It is hereby, accordingly, declared that:

(c) The participation by the people in their government shall be

ensured in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.

Section 17. (1) The State social order is founded on ideals of freedom, equality and

Justice.

(2) In furtherance of the social order-

(a) Every citizen shall have equality of rights, obligations and

opportunities before the law;

The combined effect of the above sections of the Constitution directs all organs of

government in Nigeria to ensure that all citizens participate in their government according to

the provisions of the constitution.

Chapter IV of the 1999 Constitution: Fundamental Rights

Section 42 (1) A citizen of Nigeria of a particular community, ethnic group,

place of origin, sex, religion or political opinion shall not, by

reason only that he is such a person:-

(a) be subjected either expressly by, or in the practical

application of, any law in force in Nigeria or any executive

or administrative action of the government, to disabilities

or restrictions to which citizens of Nigeria of other

communities, ethnic groups, places of origin, sex, religious

or political opinions are not made subject; or

(b) be accorded either expressly by, or in the practical

application of, any law in force in Nigeria or any such

executive or administrative action, any privilege or

advantage that is not accorded to citizens of Nigeria of

other communities, ethnic groups, places of origin, sex,

religious or political opinions.

(2) No citizen of Nigeria shall be subjected to any disability, restriction

or deprivation merely by reason of the circumstances of his birth.

Section IV of the 1999 Constitution protects the rights of all citizens from any

disability or deprivation by reason of circumstances of birth.

Chapter VI of the 1999 Constitution: Political Parties

Section 222 No association by whatever name called shall function as a party, unless -

(b) The membership of the association is open to every citizen of Nigeria

irrespective of his place of origin, circumstance of birth, sex, religion

or ethnic grouping;

There should be no barriers from registering as a member of a political party in Nigeria.

pg. 29

These constitutional provisions notwithstanding, the rights of PWDs to effectively participate

in the electoral process have been generally eroded by successive election management

bodies, political parties and other stakeholders in the electoral process.

2.4 Contributions of State Disability Laws to the Conduct of Inclusive and

Accessible Electoral Process in Nigeria

The 1999 Constitution as amended provides for the establishment of State Independent

Electoral Commissions (SIECs) to conduct local government elections. The SIECs, in

conjunction with INEC make all necessary administrative and logistic provisions for the

conduct of local government elections.

The provisions of the 1999 Constitution as amended, the 2010 Electoral Act as amended and

other relevant international and local statutes notwithstanding, it is expected that state-level

disability laws make relevant provisions to guarantee the inclusion and participation of PWDs

in political and electoral activities in the state. For this purpose therefore, we review the Ekiti

and Lagos state disability laws.

2.4.1 Ekiti State Rights of Persons with Disabilities Law 2013

Section 18; Right to Political Participation

(1) The State Independent Electoral Commission shall ensure that all

polling stations are accessible to persons with disabilities and that all

materials related to the electoral process are easily understandable by

and accessible to persons with disabilities.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the provisions contained in sub–

section (1), the measures undertaken by an Electoral Commission in

pursuance of that sub–section shall include:

a). the construction and availability of ramps at all polling

Booths

b). Separate queues for persons with disabilities at all polling

booths with clear pictorial signs;

c). The availability of ballot papers and/or electronic voting

machines with candidates’ information available in Braille

and other accessible formats;

d). the fitting of audio devices to electronic voting machines;

e). Training programs to sensitize polling officers about the

special requirements of persons with disabilities.

(3) If the Presiding Officer of a polling booth is satisfied that, due to

disability, a person with disability is unable to recognize the symbols

or to record vote without assistance, the presiding officer shall permit

the elector to take a companion of not less than eighteen years of age

to the voting compartment for recording/casting the vote.

2.4.2 Lagos State Special Peoples Law, 2011

pg. 30

Prohibition from Discrimination and Harmful Treatment. 21. (1) No person living with disability shall be discriminated against on the

ground of his or her disability by any person or institution in any manner or

circumstances whatsoever.

Right to Freedom.

30. (1) Persons living with disability shall have freedom of expression and opinion,

Including the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas

through any means of communication of their choice.

(2) Government, Corporate organization and persons shall:

(a) provide information intended for the general public to persons living

with disability in accessible formats and technologies appropriate to

the different kinds of disabilities timely and at no additional cost;

(b) Accept and facilitate the use of sign languages, Braille, augmentative

and alternative communication in all interactions.

In spite of the provisions made by these state disability laws, there are no evidences to show

that the conduct of local government elections in these states have made adequate provisions

for the inclusion of PWDs.

2.5 Contributions of International Statutes to the Conduct of Inclusive and

Accessible Electoral Process in Nigeria

Nigeria is signatory to several international statutes and a few of them have been

domesticated through acts of the Nigerian Legislature as required by Section 12 of the 1999

Constitution as amended. Some of these statutes provide for the respect of rights of PWDs as

well as their inclusion and participation in all spheres of life in Nigeria. For this purpose, we

review the African Charter on Human and Peoples Right (ACHPR) and the United Nations

Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) respectively.

2.5.1 The African Charter on Human and Peoples Right (ACHPR)

Article 18(4) of ACHPR provides that:

“The aged and disabled shall also have the right to special

measure of protection in keeping with their physical or moral

need.”

Article 13 of the ACHPR provides as follows:

“Every citizen shall have the right to participate freely in the

government of his country, either directly or through freely

chosen representatives in accordance with the provisions of

the law.”

The African Charter has been domesticated in Nigeria by an Act of the National Assembly.

Therefore the above provision can be invoked to cater for the aged and persons with

pg. 31

disability at elections. Accordingly, the INEC priority voting policy is in perfect alignment

with this provision of the Law.

2.5.2 United Nations Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD)

The UNCRPD was adopted on 13 December 2006 during the sixty-first session of the

General Assembly by resolution A/RES/61/106.

Nigeria joined a number of countries in declaring support for disability rights on Friday, 24th

September 2010, signing both the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

(CRPD) and its Optional Protocol. Nigeria became the 94th

country to ratify the Convention

and 58th

to ratify the Optional Protocol.

The CRPD is the first international, legally binding human rights treaty targeted at

comprehensively protecting the human rights of people with disabilities. Article 29 of this

Convention generally provides for ―Participation in political and public life.‖ Specifically, it

enjoins ―State Parties‖ to guarantee to persons with disabilities political rights and the

opportunity to enjoy them on an equal basis with others. Furthermore, the article demands

that State parties shall undertake ensuring that voting procedures, facilities and materials are

appropriate, accessible and easy to understand and use.

Right to vote in the CRPD

ISG Top Voter, a machine designed specifically to be used by voters with disabilities.

11

Some democracies, e.g., the US, Japan, Netherlands, Slovenia, Albania and India12

make the

necessary reasonable accommodation allowing persons with disability to cast their votes

independently using electronic voting machines and other aides which help disabled voters to

fill the paper ballot. In some others countries such as Azerbaijan, Kosovo, Canada, Ghana,

United Kingdom, and most of African and Asian countries,13

visually impaired voters can use

ballots in Braille or paper ballot templates.

Many of these and also some other democracies, Chile14

for example, use adjustable desks so

that voters on wheelchairs can approach them. Some democracies only allow another person

11

Source: www.elections.ca 12

Ibid. 13

Ibid. 14

Ibid.

pg. 32

to cast a ballot for the blind or disabled voter. Such arrangement, however, does not assure

independence or secrecy of the ballot.

In some democracies, i.e. Sweden and the US,15

all the polling places already are fully

accessible for disabled voters.

Generally speaking, a country ratifying treaty is an indication of her approval of its

provisions. This may necessitate the country modifying some of her existing laws to bring

them in conformity with the ratified treaty.

However, in Nigeria, by virtue of section 12 of 1999 Constitution, an international

Convention like the UNCRPD, would need to be domesticated by an act of the National

Assembly before it can assume the force of Law in Nigeria. The domestication of the

UNCRPD has not been done in Nigeria, and to that extent, the effect of the Convention in

Nigeria is at best merely persuasive, and not binding.

2.6 Summary

From the above appraisal of local and international statues viz-a-viz the issues of inclusive

and accessible electoral process for PWDs in Nigeria, we observe that the key challenge is

not substantially in the inadequacy of legal and policy frame works. Rather, it is more with

the poor enforcement of, and/or compliance with existing laws.

We acknowledge that the 1999 Constitution as amended, the 2010 Electoral Act as amended

and other relevant national and sub-national legal and policy frameworks require urgent and

necessary amendments to meet with international standards and best practice in the conduct

of inclusive and accessible electoral process. Nonetheless, PWDs and other advocacy groups

should begin their advocacies by holding government, election management bodies, political

parties and other responsible agencies accountable for the full implementation of, and

compliance with existing laws.

15

Ibid.

pg. 33

Chapter 3

DESCRIPTIVE NARRATIVES OF ACTIVITIES BEFORE, DURING

AND AFTER THE 2015 GENERAL ELECTIONS

3.0 Introduction

World over, democracy is considered the best and most progressive form of government.

Nigeria began a stable and ever growing democratic journey in 1999 after the first, second

and third republics were truncated. However, since the restoration of democracy, the

challenge of ensuring inclusion and access of all citizens in the political and electoral

processes irrespective of their social, ethnic, economic, gender and disability status has

remained seemingly irresolvable

As the 2015 general elections approached, civil society

groups, especially disabled people‘s organizations and

international development agencies in Nigeria stepped-

up advocacies to ensure substantial inclusion and

access for persons with disabilities, women, the

elderly and other excluded groups in the political and

electoral processes. With the support of the State

Accountability and Voice Initiative (SAVI) of the

DFID in Lagos, LACSOP and DPAI set up the CSO

2015 General Elections Situation Room to monitor

and observe the activities before, during and after the

elections.

This chapter describes, in narrative terms, the observed

happenings at the 2015 elections at the federal and

state levels. Realizing that elections are not just about

the happenings on election days, it considers what

transpired, pre, during and post voting process and the

part played by different stakeholders.

3.1 Pre-election

It is common knowledge that voting for the right people is the first step in the journey of a

thousand miles that will lead to the Promised Land of good and inclusive governance. To get

the desired votes, political parties engage in campaigns. Having witnessed many elections,

the 2015 election campaigns remains the most passionate, so far, dividing many friends and

in some cases relatives along party, ethnic and religious lines. The campaigns witnessed the

involvement of women, youths and Persons with Disabilities (PWDs).

The bar of campaigns was raised as political parties went to every nook and cranny,

employing many strategies to woo electorates. The usual political debates by candidates took

place though some candidates declined.

More Nigerians became more politically conscious and active unlike the previous sheer

apathy. Engaging in political discussions in busses, on queues, at newspapers vendors‘

Picture 1: Dwarfs celebrating with a candidate at a political rally in Lagos.

Picture 2: CSO members presenting IEC on voter’s registration in Lagos, Nigeria

pg. 34

stands, canteens etc became very common. Most Nigerian youths became hyperactive on the

social media space which provided an inexpensive platform of sharing political opinions.

Admittedly, many used uncouth language and insults at the slightest provocation, albeit, they

played their part.

The Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) were not left out as many of them facilitated town

hall meetings which the political parties and INEC bought into. CSOs pushed for all-inclusive

manifestoes and deliverables in favour of women, youths and PWDs. For instance, in Lagos,

LACSOP organized and participated at several citizens consultative forum. LACSOP also

developed and presented a Citizens Charter to gubernatorial and State Assembly candidates

to elicit their commitment to people-oriented laws and policies should they emerge as

winners. LACSOP also conducted Mandate Protection Campaigns among the citizens;

distributing Mandate Protection leaflets (See Appendix C) across the state with a view to

enlighten them on the need to protect their votes, hold elected leaders accountable to their

campaign promises and identify the roles and responsibilities of key stakeholders in the

electoral process.

At the heart of the CSO-lead advocacies before the elections was the need to ensure inclusion

and access for PWDs. LACSOP collaborated with DPAI in Lagos state to conduct several

engagements with INEC, political parties, the media and other stakeholders in this respect.

These efforts stimulated more responsiveness on the part of INEC which ensured that access

of PWDs to electoral information such as civic and voter education and media materials were

reasonably enhanced. As political party campaigns heightened, for the first time ever in the

political history of Nigeria, parties ensured that they had sign language interpreters at most of

their campaign rallies across the states while INEC public announcements carried on

television were interpreted by sign language experts.16

However, in many cases, the campaign was more of unabashed calumny with the tactic of

embarrassing mudslinging of candidates and supporters. The social media became a battle

ground where ethnic and religious motivated hatred and threats of violence were spewed.

People cared less about ‗civility‘ as information of yester years were bandied about like

gospel, defaming one another without a care about the offences of slander and libel. This

increased all manner of apprehension from scuttling the exercise to outright war. In fact some

predicted the end of the entity called Nigeria!

There was disgraceful crumbs distribution in form of money, telephone handsets and food

stuffs, leaving much blame on the desk of INEC due to its inability to regulate political

campaign finances.

INEC is created by the constitution and empowered by section 154 of the Electoral Act to

conduct civic education and enlightenment in the print and electronic media to enhance its

functions. One of the functions according to section 2 is promoting knowledge of sound

democratic election processes. INEC‘s part in pre-election matters like qualification for

registration and acceptable campaign standards left much to be desired. For instance contrary

to section 95(1) of the Electoral Act prohibiting tainted, abusive, intemperate, slanderous

political campaign or slogan likely to injure religious, ethnic, tribal or sectional feelings.

Many candidates were not only labelled by their ethnicity and religion but caricatured,

provoking negative reactions from their supporters. Again, in direct contravention of

Subsection (3) Places designated for religious worship, and public office were used for 16

IRI report p.5

pg. 35

political campaigns, rallies, processions, promotion and shredding of political parties,

candidates, and their programs. In the face of subsections (5) and (6), our media was

inundated with news of burnings and killings of members and properties of the opposition,

acts perpetuated by loyalist groups who many times possessed arms. Despite the commission

of these offences, nobody was seen to be prosecuted not to talk of paying the penalty of N1,

000,000.00 or imprisonment for the term or 12 months; and (b) in the case of a political party,

to a fine or N2, 000,000.00 in the first instance, and N1, 000,000.00 for any subsequent

offence as provided under the Law. Section 130, penalize giving or accepting of money or

any other inducement for voting or refraining from voting after the date of an election has

been announced with the fine of N100.000.00 or imprisonment for a term of 12 months or

both. Every form of inducement was distributed at campaign rallies. Even those who voted

the other way despite the inducements could be guilty of ‗receiving…‘

Some have excused INEC for overlooking some of its functions because it grappled with the

task of distributing the Permanent Voters Card (PVC) to majority of registered voters.

Unfortunately, some Nigerians were disenfranchised by inability to collect PVCs.

The security agents tried to quell tension but it did not stop, residents of different tribes

fleeing home in droves especially wives and children due to apprehension of electoral

violence.

The media did its best in informing Nigerians of the happenings though some of them did not

only exhibit party preference but descended into the arena of politics in terms of reportage

and coverage.

3.2 During Election

3.2.1 Presidential and National Assembly Elections

The presidential and National Assembly elections held on the 28th

of March, 2015, and their

aftermath have increased Nigeria‘s stature around the globe. The presidential position had 14

contestants with only one being female, though the vice president‘s position had four

females.17

None of the candidates was a PWD but National Conscience Party (NCP) had a

PWD contest for senatorial position in Delta state.18

The presidential election had a massive

turnout of Nigerians who stood under the rain and scorching sun across the country to vote

for their preferred candidates. It is worthy of mention that all the presidential candidates got

votes in all the states.19

17 final list of presidential and national assembly candidates for 2015 general elections available @

http://www.inecnigeria.org/?page_id=3508 accessed 6th

May 2015 President Goodluck Jonathan (PDP),

General Muhammad Buhari (APC), Prof. Comfort Oluremi Sonaiya (Kowa), Ambrose Albert (HDP), Ganiyu

Galadima (ACPN), Rafiu Salau(AD), Dr.Nani Ibrahim Ahmad (ADC), Martin Onovo (NCP), Tunde

Anifowoshe-Kelani (AA), Chekwas Okorie (UPP), Ayeni Musa Adebayo (APA), Sam Eke (CPP), Allagoa Kelvin

Chinedu (PPN), Godson Mgbodile Ohaenyem (UDP). 18

IRI report p.5

19 2015 Presidential election result available @ http://www.inecnigeria.org/?inecnews=2015-presidential-

election-result-2 accessed 6th

May 2015.

pg. 36

Observed media reports across the country indicated the participation of PWDs, women

(including pregnant women) and the elderly who defied all their accessibility challenges to

participate in the voting exercise.

3.2.2 Gubernatorial and State Assembly Elections

Nigeria‘s 36 governors have considerable sway being chief executive officers in their

different states. The governorship elections held in

29 out of the 36 states on April 11th

2015. Elections

were not held in 7 states20

though the House of

Assembly elections were conducted in all the 36

states. There were 760 contestants with only 24

female gubernatorial candidates and 63 deputy

gubernatorial candidates. None of the gubernatorial

candidates was a PWD but PDP had two PWD

candidates for state assembly elections in Plateau

and Jigawa.21

It was observed that turnout of voters

during gubernatorial elections was lower than the

presidential.

During the presidential and gubernatorial elections,

it was observed that PWDs, elderly and pregnant

women experienced priority voting in many polling

units. Women, youths and PWDs participated as

party agents, for instance some political parties presented PWDs for training as party agents

in Adamawa and OndoStates. Again women, youth and disability groups like JONAPWD

and Disability policy and Advocacy initiative (DPAI) were accredited by INEC as domestic

observers during the polls.

In places like Lagos, generally, electorates comported themselves though in a particular

polling unit, a political party distributed alcohol causing commotion. There was also

incidence of ballot boxes snatching questioning the performance by security agents.22

This

questions the claims of INEC and CSOs engaging political parties on proper act as contained

in the Electoral Act.

It is worthy of note that in Lagos, security agents were generally civil.

Access of PWDs to information was not guaranteed as election materials were designed in

simple language for all category of voters but not Braille or tactile format for blind voters.

Use of sign language for the benefit of deaf was not used.23

Again, INEC failed in its commitment of situating polling units in accessible locations away

from obstacles and provisions of ramps. Polling units were used for the polls irrespective of

the condition of their location. In accordance with the Electoral Act, PWDs in need of

assistance during the voting exercise were allowed to bring along persons of their choice,

while some were assisted by other voters and INEC staff. In Lafia, Nassarawa and Minna,

20

Bayelsa, Edo, Kogi, Anambra, Ondo, Osun and Ekiti states 21

IRI report p.5 22

Lagos election observation findings 23

IRI report p.5

Picture a pwd casting his vote in a transparent ballot box

pg. 37

Niger, ballots papers and boxes were placed on the ground to enable PWDs to thumb-print

and cast their votes. In Niger, there were no obstacles in the paths leading up to the polling

units and booths, but in Kogi, Kaduna, Nasarawa and Lagos some polling units had

obstacles hindering PWD access.24

INEC officials were generally punctual though some came late. However, in some parts of

Lagos, they allowed people vote without accreditation, i.e. on self recognition. Card reader

many times malfunctioned. Political parties in some places provided INEC staff with foods,

drinks and other logistics like chairs and tables which could possibly induce favourable

treatment. Many ballot papers were voided evidencing more civic education on proper

voting.25

3.3 Post Election

Most Nigerians remained in their polling units till election results were announced. The

palpable tension and uncertainty that the election occasioned right up to the collation centre

was reduced if not eliminated when the sitting president called, congratulated and conceded

defeat to the candidate of the opposition party. This almost dramatic novelty and gracious

gesture has changed the political geography of Nigeria in more ways than has been so far

computed. As several observers have noted, Nigerian democracy has stabilized further having

passed the test considered crucial by democratic theorists.26

3.4 Summary

Nigerians have spoken through their votes and the winners have all taken this moralistic,

patriotic, and high sounding oath of office -

„I, ............ do solemnly swear/affirm that I will be faithful and

bear true allegiance to the Federal Republic of Nigeria; …I

will discharge my duties to the best of my ability, faithfully

and in accordance with the Constitution of the Federal

Republic of Nigeria and the law, and always in the interest of

the sovereignty, integrity, solidarity, well-being and prosperity

of the Federal Republic of Nigeria; that I will strive to

preserve the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles

of State Policy contained in the Constitution of the Federal

Republic of Nigeria; that I will not allow my personal interest

to influence my official conduct or my official decisions; that

I will to the best of my ability preserve, protect and defend the

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria; that I will

abide by the Code of Conduct contained in the Fifth Schedule

to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria; that in

all circumstances, I will do right to all manner of people,

according to law, without fear or favour, affection or ill-will;

…; and that I will devote myself to the service and well-being

24

IRI report p.5,6 25

Lagos election observation findings 26

Buhari opportunity to change Nigeria’s narrative Punch April 3 2015 Ayo Olukotun

pg. 38

of the people of Nigeria. So help me God. (Underlining for

emphasis)

It is hoped that they will stick to the above oath by bearing true allegiance to Nigeria through

inclusive governance as well as sustaining the project ‗Nigeria‘ by unifying Nigerians. The

youths, women and PWDs could not be said to have enjoyed perfect Inclusiveness in the

2015 elections but for the PWDs it was a giant step in the right direction. Political ethics was

not at its best calling for improvement in 2019. However, our democracy is growing and it is

indeed a learning process.

pg. 39

CHAPTER 4

QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF OBSERVATIONS FROM THE 2015

GENERAL ELECTIONS

4.0 Introduction

This chapter is structured into 3 main sections. In the first section, the methods adopted in the

gathering and analyses of data as well as some issues with respect to the data gathering

instrument are discussed. In the second section, state-by-state analysis of data is presented

while the third section presents analysis of data based on zonal grouping of states in line with

the six geopolitical zones in Nigeria.

4.1 Methodology

4.1.1 Design:

The conduct of election observation is generally structured in line with the processes of

conducting survey studies. This is because data is collected by enumerators (Election

Observers) on the field from targeted human and institutional actors within a specific

geographical location before, during and after elections

Often times, election observation adopts one, two or more survey methods of data gathering

and analysis including population sampling, behaviour observation, administration of

questionnaire, the use of various tools of data analysis, etc.

The general objective of election observation just as in survey researches is to investigate,

identify, and analyze certain behavioural trends of a selected sample population with a view

to determining the level of its prevalence within a given population as well as the effects of

such behavioural trends on the larger population and the polity.

The observation of the 2015 general elections was therefore conducted as a survey study of

the general elections with a view to determining its level of inclusivity and accessibility to

marginalized electorates comprising of voters with disabilities, pregnant women and the

elderly voters.

4.1.2 Population:

The observation of the 2015 general elections focused on both human and institutional

population. The human population is constituted by all eligible and registered voters in

Nigeria while institutional population is constituted by the election management bodies,

political parties, security agencies, media organizations, federal and state governments

(comprising of the executive, legislature and the judiciary), and development agencies.

According to World Bank Estimates, Nigeria currently has a population of about 170 million

people.27

However, the records of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)

27

Source: www.worldpopulationreview.com/countries/nigeria-population/

pg. 40

puts the voting population at over 80 million people out of which over 50 million voters were

registered for the 2015 general elections.28

Again, using World Bank and WHO Disability Population Ratio of 10 to 15%,29

Nigeria has

about 25 million persons with disabilities and about 10 million of them are of voting age.

Currently, there is no official record of voters with disabilities.

INEC operates a national headquarters as well as offices in the 36 states, FCT Abuja and the

774 local government areas in Nigeria. Political parties and security agencies also replicate

similar organizational structure across the country, while CSOs, media organizations and

development agencies operate in specific locations considered to be of interest to them.

In 2015, INEC registered a total of 25 political parties which featured candidates in the

presidential, national assembly, gubernatorial and state assembly elections.

4.1.3 Sample Size and Sampling Method:

DPAI, LACSOP and its CSO partners observed the 2015 general elections in 10 states. These

states constitute the sample size for the purpose of this report.

The determination and selection of states, local government areas, electoral wards and polling

units within which the observation was conducted was determined by the following factors:

Observation was conducted in states where the DFID‘s SAVI programme currently

operates and in states which have participated in SAVI replication and knowledge

sharing activities.

The observation took place in local government areas, wards and polling units where

SAVI CSO partners are based.

SAVI CSO partners also observed the elections in local government areas, wards and

polling units where their staff is either resident and/or registered to vote.

For the purpose of easy comprehension, it will be important to present a description of the

geographical area covered during the observation exercise and within which data was

collected.

28

Source: www.inecnigeria.org/ 29

WHO World Bank report on disability, (2011); www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/en/index.html

pg. 41

Table 4.1 States and Geopolitical Zones.

GEO-POLITICAL ZONES STATES

SOUTHWEST LAGOS

OSUN

SOUTHEAST ANAMBRA

ENUGU

NORTHCENTRAL NIGER

NORTHWEST JIGAWA

KADUNA

KANO

ZAMFARA

NORTHEAST YOBE

1. The above table shows that a total of 10 states were covered during the observation. 2

states were selected from the southwest, 2 states from the southeast, 1 state from the

north central, 4 states from the northwest and only 1 state from the northeast.

2. In all, the northwest had most; 4 of the states representing 40% of the total states

covered.

Table 4.2 Details of Local Government Areas and Polling Units Covered in each

State and Geopolitical Zones

GEOPOLI

TICAL

ZONES

STAT

ES

LGAs & LCDAs

COVERED

NO.

OF

LGAs

&

LCDA

s

COVE

RED

POLLING UNITS

COVERED

NO.

OF

POLLI

NG

UNIT

S

COVE

RED

SOUTHW

EST

LAGO

S - IKEJA

- SURULERE

- AGEGE

- MUSHIN

- ALAUSA

- OREGUN

- OJO

- ALIMOS

HO

- MANGORO

9 - OLUSOS

UN

OREGUN

017

- PU 001

- PU 015

- PU 012

- PU 023

- PU 022

- PU 004B

- PU 005

- PU 004A

- PU 075

- PU 072

- PU 014

37

pg. 42

- PU 30C

- PU

032

- PU

013

- PU

015

- PU

012

- PU

016

- PU

107

- PU

108

- PU

032

-

PU066

- PU

061

- PU

002

WAR

D 1

- PU

002

WAR

D 2

- PU

032

- PU

013

- PU

015

- PU

012

- PU

016

- PU

107

- PU

108

- PU

032

- PU

066

- PU

061

- PU

pg. 43

002

WAR

D 1

- PU

002

WAR

D 2

-

OSUN - EDE

NORTH

- OLORUN

DA

- IFEDAYO

- BOKIPE

- OBOKUN

- OSOGBO

- BOLUWA

DURO

- EGBEDO

RE

- ATAKUM

OSA

WEST

- IFE EAST

- EDE

SOUTH

- IREPODU

N

- ODO-

OYIN

- OROLU

- ILA

ORANGU

N

- ODO-

OFIN

16 - WARD 8

UNIT 04

- WARD

02/003

- OSU

- WARD

02/007

- WARD

03/ PU

004

5

SOUTHEA

ST

ANAM

BRA

-- 0 -- 0

ENUG

U

-- 0 - PU002

- PU 003

- PU 004

- PU 005

- PU 007

- PU 008

- PU 001

- PU 011

- PU002

- PU 003

16

pg. 44

- PU 004

- PU 005

- PU 007

- PU 008

- PU 001

- PU 011

NORTHCE

NTRAL

NIGER -- 0 -- 0

NORTHW

EST

JIGA

WA - KANGA

MA

- HADEJIA

- HADEJIA

- KIYAMA

- KIRIKA

SAMMA

- DUTSA

- RINGIM

- RINGIM

- BATRI

KANDI

- JAHUN

- JAHUN

- ANYO

- MIGA

- GURU

TOWN

- HADEJIA

- KHAWA

- UNGUW

AR

BAREBA

RI

- WARD

004

- WARD

005

- WARD

01

- WARD

03

- WARD

003

- WARD

004

- WARD

009

- WARD

40 - ALBAS

HI PU

001

- RAMF

A PU

004

- RAMF

A PU

006

- SHAM

ARING

WARD

PU 002

- MANT

AFARI

PU

001/2

- KACH

A

WARD

PU 006

- WARD

006 PU

007

- WARD

006 PU

005

- BADU

RA PU

003

- WARD

PU 006

- PU 008

- ANYO

FADA

A/B PU

- WARD

09 PU

008

- PU 002

80

pg. 45

007

- WARD

010

- WARD

011

- WARD

08

- WARD

01

- WARD

09

- WARD

002

- WARD

006

- WARD

03

- WARD

007

- WARD

06

- WARD

005

- WARD

011

- WARD

008

- WARD

008

- WARD

001

- HADEJ

IA

MAKE

RS 001

- BAKIN

KASU

WA

001/A&

B

- BIRNI

WA

001/2

- PU 01

- PU 003

- PU 006

- PU 010

- PU 04

- PU 003

- PU 002

- PU 009

- PU 006

- PU 08

- PU 012

- PU 01

- PU 05

- PU 8

- PU 007

- PU 008

- PU 6

- PU 010

- PU 006

- PU 04

- PU 003

- PU 002

- PU 002

- ALBAS

HI PU

001

- RAMF

A PU

004

- RAMF

A PU

006

- SHAM

ARING

WARD

PU 002

pg. 46

- MANT

AFARI

PU

001/2

- KACH

A

WARD

PU 006

- WARD

006 PU

007

- WARD

006 PU

005

- BADU

RA PU

003

- WARD

PU 006

- PU 008

- ANYO

FADA

A/B PU

- WARD

09 PU

008

- PU 002

- HADEJ

IA

MAKE

RS 001

- BAKIN

KASU

WA

001/A&

B

- BIRNI

WA

001/2

- PU 01

- PU 003

- PU 006

- PU 010

- PU 04

- PU 003

- PU 002

- PU 009

- PU 006

- PU 08

pg. 47

- PU 012

- PU 01

- PU 05

- PU 8

- PU 007

- PU 008

- PU 6

- PU 010

- PU 006

- PU 04

- PU 003

- PU 002

- PU 002

-

-

-

-

-

KADU

NA - MATERA

- KAKURI

- ROMI

- HAYIN

DAN

MANI

- MANDO

ROAD

- MATERA

- KAKURI

- ROMI

- HAYIN

DAN

MANI

- MANDO

ROAD

10 - BABAND

ODO

- PU OO6

- PU OO6

- PU 011

- BABAND

ODO

- PU OO6

- PU OO6

- PU 011

8

KANO -- 0 - VAP

- VAP

- VAP

- VAP

- VAP

- BTG

- BTG

- BTG

- BTG

- BTG

- G&SI

- G&SI

- G&Si

20

pg. 48

- G&SI

- PPMCN

- PPMCN

- PPMCH

- WRWSI

- WRWSI

- WRWSI

ZAMF

ARA

-- 0 -- 0

NORTHEA

ST

YOBE -- 0 -- 0

TOTAL: 5 10 75 166

1. A total of 75 Local Government areas were covered while a total of 166 polling units were

covered in 10 states across 5 geopolitical zones.

2. Jigawa state had a total of 40 LGAs representing 53.3%; Osun State had 16 LGAs

representing 21.3%; Kaduna state had 10 LGAs representing 13.3%; while Lagos state had

the lowest of 9 LGAs representing 12%.

3. Again, JigawaState had 80 polling units representing 48.2%; Lagos sate had 37 polling

units representing 22.3%; Kano state had 20 polling units representing 12.05%; Enugu state

had 16 polling units representing 9.6%; Kaduna state had 8 polling units representing 4.8%;

while Osun had the lowest number of 5 polling units representing 3.01%.

-

-

- - 80

- - -

- TOTAL - 75 - 166

pg. 49

4.1.4 Methods of Observation, Data Collection and Analysis:

DPAI and LACSOP designed and deployed an Inclusive Election Monitoring Checklist as the

key instrument and guide for their election observers. Data was also collected based on

guided personal observation of each accredited Election Observer in line with INEC‘s

Guideline and regulations.

The Monitoring Checklist contained items which each observer is to mark as either

―available‖ (YES) or ―not available‖ (NO) respectively. These items have been identified as

key requirements for the inclusion and access for persons with disabilities in line with

international best practice and standards; but in full recognition of the social, economic,

political, environmental, technological and infrastructural peculiarities of the Nigerian

electoral process.

Other form of data used in this report was sourced through desk review of relevant literature

including official records/publications of INEC and other stakeholders.

4.1.5 Limitations:

The Monitoring Checklist used for the observation was originally designed to be ―disability‖

focused. The Checklist was designed to monitor the compliance of the conduct of election

with attitudinal, procedural, infrastructural and institutional ethics and standards of a

disability-inclusive election. It was not designed to capture electoral issues affecting women

(especially pregnant women) and the elderly. However, Observers reached a consensus to

take cognizance of other vulnerable groups including pregnant women and the elderly who

also required similar inclusivity and accessibility electoral needs.

Similarly, the Monitoring Checklist did not provide for the capturing of the numeric value as

well as the disaggregation of gender and age of voters with disabilities, pregnant women and

the elderly who turn-out to vote. As such, these issues were not included in the data gathered

and analyzed.

The monitoring Checklist also did not provide for the proper capturing of bio-data of

observers and the description of state, local government, ward and polling unit to be covered

for the exercise. However, Observers were guided to capture these details in their reports.

DPAI and LACSOP relied basically on the voluntary efforts of its members and CSO

partners to conduct these exercise due to inadequate resources. Observers in other states

outside of Lagos could not be effectively engaged for orientation and training. Hence the

seeming distortions and inconsistency in the way observation was conducted and

report/feedbacks compiled by Observers for each state.

The lack of resources also affected the scope and spread of the observation exercise. For

instance, restriction of the exercise to SAVI states and local governments where CSO

partners operated meant that no conscious plan could be made to ensure that equal number of

states was selected in each geopolitical zone or equal number of local government areas

selected in each state, etc. As it will be noticed, no state in the south-south geopolitical zone

was included.

pg. 50

Finally, in spite of these limitations, the relevance, significance and validity of this

observation exercise cannot be completely ignored. These identified limitations will serve as

yard-stick for improvements in future efforts.

4.2 State-by-State Presentation and Analysis of Data

Table 4.3 Observation of the 2015 Presidential and National Assembly

Elections in Lagos State.

STATE

Valid LAGOS

ELECTION DAY

Valid PRESIDENTIAL

LGA

Valid

AGEGE

ALAUSA

IKEJA

MUSHIN

OJO

OREGUN

SURULERE

POLLING UNIT

Valid

OLUSOSUN

OREGUN 0

PU 001

PU 004A

PU 004B

PU 005

PU 012

PU 014

pg. 51

PU 015

PU 022

PU 023

PU 072

PU 075

PU 30C

ACCESSIBILITY TO PU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS

Percent

Valid

EARLY 80.0

LATE

TOTAL

20.0

100.0

SECURITY AT PU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PWDS PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 40.0

YES

TOTAL

60.0

100.0

ELDERLY PRESENT

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 26.7

YES

TOTAL

73.3

100.0

ACCREDITATION TIME

pg. 52

Percent

Valid EARLY 73.3

LATE

TOTAL

26.7

100.0

PRIORITY VOTING

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWD

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 6.7

NOT APPLICABLE 13.3

RESPONSIVE

TOTAL

80.0

100.0

ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWD

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 6.7

RESPONSIVE

TOTAL

93.3

100.0

DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS

Cumulative

Percent

Valid NO 6.7

YES

TOTAL

93.3

100.0

1. From the above table, all polling units observed; 100% reported that polling booths were

located in areas accessible to PWDs.

2. Most of the polling units observed; 80% reported that polling officials arrived early.

3. All the polling units observed; 100% reported the presence of relevant security officials

thus guaranteeing the peace and enhancing participation of voters with disabilities.

4. Many polling units observed; 60% reported the presence of voters with disabilities, while

all polling units observed; 100% reported the presence of elderly voters. Most polling units

observed; 73.3% reported the presence and participation of pregnant women in the voting

process.

5. Most of the polling units observed; 73.3% reported that accreditation commenced early.

pg. 53

6. All polling units observed; 100% reported that electoral officials strictly complied with the

INEC policy on "Priority Voting.‖

7. Most polling units observed; 80% and 93.3% reported that the attitude of electoral officials

and other electorates respectively was responsive towards voters with disabilities and other

vulnerable electorates.

8. Most polling units observed; 93.3% reported that INEC properly and adequately displayed

posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral materials.

Finally, indicators from the above table reveal that the conduct of the 2015 Presidential and

National Assembly elections IN Lagos State was reasonably inclusive of, and accessible to

marginalized electorates including voters with disabilities, elderly voters and pregnant

women.

pg. 54

Table 4.4 Observation of the 2015 Gubernatorial Elections in Lagos State

STATE

Valid LAGOS

ELECTION DAY

Valid GUBERNATARIAL

LGA

Valid

AGEGE

ALIMOSHO

MANGORO

MUSHIN

POLLINGUNIT

Valid PU 002 W

PU 012

PU 013

PU 015

PU 016

PU 032

PU 061

PU 066

PU 107

PU 108

pg. 55

ACCESSIBILITY TO PU

Percent

Valid NO 33.3

YES

TOTAL

66.7

100.0

ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS

Percent

Valid EARLY 83.3

LATE

TOTAL

16.7

100.0

SECURITY AT PU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PWDS PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 33.3

YES

TOTAL

66.7

100.0

ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 66.7

YES

TOTAL

33.3

100.0

pg. 56

ACCREDITATION TIME

Percent

Valid EARLY 83.3

LATE

TOTAL

16.7

100.0

PRIORITY VOTING

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWD

Percent

Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0

ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWD

Percent

Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0

DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS

Cumulative

Percent

Valid NO 8.3

YES

TOTAL

91.7

100.0

1. From the above table, it can be observed that 66.7% of polling units observed show that

accessibility is high meaning that many polling units are located in accessible areas to

PWDs.

2. Observation shows that in 83.3% of polling units covered, election officials rived early;

indicating that voters with disabilities were attended to early enough and were not

subjected to hardship.

3. All polling units observed; 100% reported presence of relevant security personnel.

4. Most polling units observed; 66.7% reported the presence of various numbers of voters

with disabilities, while all polling units observed; 100% reported participation of elderly

voters. However, most polling units observed; 66.7% reported the absence of pregnant

women.

5. In most polling units observed; 83.3% reported that accreditation commenced early.

6. All polling units observed; 100% reported that INEC's policy on "Priority Voting" was

strictly observed.

pg. 57

7. Again, all polling units observed; 100% reported that the attitude of INEC staff and other

electorates to voters with disabilities and other vulnerable groups was "responsive.‖

8. Finally, the above table show that most of the polling units observed; 91.7% reported that

INEC properly and adequately displayed posters containing voting procedures and

guidelines and other electoral materials.

From the indicators contained in the above table, it can be observed that the 2015

gubernatorial elections in Lagos state was reasonably inclusive of, and accessible to voters

with disabilities and other vulnerable groups such as pregnant women and the elderly.

Issues and Trends Analysis

(i) In Lagos state, all polling units observed; 100% during the presidential and

gubernatorial elections reported that there was full compliance of electoral officials to

INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting.‖ This implied that the conduct of the 2015 general

elections (Presidential, National Assembly, Gubernatorial and State Assembly) was

reasonably inclusive of, and accessible to marginalized electorates including PWDs,

the elderly and pregnant women respectively. The number of polling units located in

areas accessible to PWDs dropped significantly from 100% in the presidential

elections to 66% in the gubernatorial elections. Although this may be due to the fact

that the Election Observers decided to observe the presidential elections in polling

units different from those in which they observed the gubernatorial elections, it should

be noted that a significantly high number of polling units are located in areas not

accessible to voters with disabilities.

(ii) While all polling units in both elections reported the presence of relevant security

officials, there was an appreciable increase of polling units which reported early arrival

of polling officials from 80% in the presidential elections to 83% in the gubernatorial

elections. Meanwhile, it was observed that number of polling unit which reported early

commencement of accreditation increased from 73% to 83% from the presidential to

the gubernatorial elections respectively. This trend indicate that vulnerable voters feel

a sense of security and high confidence to vote while early arrival and accreditation

tend to reduce the negative health impacts which a long wait would have had on voters

with physical disability, pregnant women and the elderly respectively. This in turn may

be responsible for the relatively high turnout of marginalized voters.

(iii) The number of polling units which reported presence of voters with disabilities

increased marginally from 60% during the presidential elections to 66% during the

gubernatorial elections. However, number of pregnant women dropped drastically

from 73% during the presidential election to 34% during the gubernatorial election. All

polling units in both elections reported 100% turn out of elderly voters. This trend

show that there is a reasonably wide spread of marginalized voters including those

with disabilities, the elderly and pregnant women across a large number of polling

units. It also implies a reasonably high turnout which may not be unconnected with

INEC‘s policy on priority voting.

(iv) Observations revealed that during the 2015 presidential and gubernatorial elections,

not less than 80% of polling units reported that the attitude of electoral officials and

non-disabled electorates was very responsive towards voters with disabilities, the

elderly and pregnant women. This trend indicates that awareness and capacity on

issues of inclusive electoral process is rapidly increasing among electoral officials and

non-disabled electorates. This trend may also have encouraged the noticeable (though

marginal) increase of voters with disabilities from the presidential to the gubernatorial

pg. 58

elections; as well as the sustenance of 100% turn out among elderly voters and

encouraged high turn-out of pregnant women.

(v) Finally, not less than 90% of polling units observed during the presidential and

gubernatorial elections in Lagos State reported that electoral officials properly and

adequately displayed all voting materials and made them accessible to all voters

including those with disabilities. This trend may have helped to keep all voters

including those with disabilities reasonably informed on how to conduct them during

and after voting. This may also have been responsible for the peaceful conduct of all

voters and the enhancement of the participation of voters with disabilities.

pg. 59

Table 4.5 Observation of the 2015 General Elections in Osun State

STATE

Valid OSUN

ELECTIONDAY

Valid GENERAL

LGA

Valid EDE NORTH

OLORUNDA

IFEDAYO

BOKIPE

OBOKUN

OSOGBO

BOLUWADURO

EGBEDORE

ATAKUMOSA-

WEST

IFE EAST

EDE SOUTH

IREPODUN

ODO-OYIN

OROLU

ILA ORANGUN

ODO-OFIN

POLLING UNIT

Valid - WARD 8

UNIT 04

- WARD

02/003

- OSU

- WARD

02/007

- WARD

02/004

pg. 60

ACCESSIBILITYTOPU

Percent

Valid NO 31.2

YES 68.8

Total 100.0

ARRIVALOFINECOFFICIALS

Percent

Valid EARLY 68.8

LATE 31.2

Total 100.0

SECURITYATPU

Percent

Valid NO 12.5

YES 87.5

Total 100.0

PWDs PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 31.3

YES 68.7

Total 100.0

ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 12.5

YES 87.5

Total 100.0

PREGNANTWOMENPRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 12.5

YES 87.5

Total 100.0

pg. 61

ACCREDITATIONTIME

Percent

Valid EARLY 81.2

LATE 18.8

Total 100.0

PRIORITYVOTING

Percent

Valid NO 12.5

YES 87.5

TOTAL 100.0

ATTITUDEOFINECTOPWD

Percent

Valid NONE 10.5

INDIFFER 23.0

REACTIVE 6.3

RESPONSIVE 60.2

Total 100.0

ATTITUDEOFELECTORATETOPWD

Valid Percent

NONE 12.4

INDIFFERENT

RESPONSIVE

31.3

56.3

Total 100.0

DISPLAYOFIECMATERIALS

Percent

Valid NO

YES

TOTAL

18.7

81.3

100.0

1. The above table indicates that many polling units observed; 68.8% reported that

polling units are located in areas accessible to voters with disabilities.

2. Again, many of the polling units observed; 68.8% reported that electoral officials

arrived early.

pg. 62

3. Most polling units observed; 87.5% reported that relevant security officials were

present.

4. Many polling units observed; 68.7% reported the presence of voters with disabilities,

while 87.5% reported the presence of elderly voters and pregnant women respectively.

5. Most polling units observed; 81.2% indicated that accreditation commenced early.

6. Most polling units observed; 87.5% reported strict compliance with INEC's policy on

"Priority Voting.‖

7. A simple majority of polling units observed; 56.3% and 60.2% reported that the

attitude of INEC officials and non-disabled electorates respectively was responsive to

voters with disabilities.

8. Most of the polling units observed; 81.3% reported that INEC properly and adequately

displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral

materials.

Issues and Trends Analysis

(i) In Osun state, it was observed that the level of compliance with INEC‘s policy on

priority voting during the general elections was significantly high. This implied that

the conduct of the 2015 general elections (Presidential, National Assembly,

Gubernatorial and State Assembly) was reasonably inclusive of, and accessible to

marginalized electorates including PWDs, the elderly and pregnant women

respectively.

(ii) It is also observed that other indicators of inclusive and accessible electoral process

including accessible polling units, presence of security, early arrival of electoral

officials and commencement of accreditation, etc were also significantly high.

However, observation shows that this trend is not in same proportion with turn-out and

possible participation of voters with disabilities.

(iii) In addition, it is observed that the responsive attitude among electoral officials and

non-disabled electorates stood barely above average of 50%; similar to the rate of turn-

out among voters with disabilities. This trend suggests possibility of poor awareness

and enlightenment among voters with disabilities and the larger public on issues of

inclusive electoral process.

(iv) Nonetheless, the observed trend of inclusive electoral process in Osun state remains

quite positive and reasonably favourable for the inclusion and accessibility of voters

with disabilities and other marginalized electorates.

pg. 63

Table 4.6 Observation of the 2015 General Elections in Enugu State

STATE

Valid ENUGU

ELECTIONDAY

T

Valid GENERAL

LGA

Percent

Valid 11.1

PU 001 11.1

PU 003 11.1

PU 004 11.1

PU 005 11.1

PU 007 11.1

PU 008 11.1

PU 011 11.1

PU002 11.1

Total 100.0

ACCESSIBILITYTOPU

Percent

Valid NO 22.2

YES 77.8

Total 100.0

ARRIVALOFINECOFFICIALS

Percent

Valid EARLY 77.8

LATE 22.2

Total 100.0

pg. 64

SECURITYATPU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PWDs PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 11.1

YES 88.9

Total 100.0

ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PREGNANTWOMENPRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 33.3

YES 66.7

Total 100.0

ACCREDITATIONTIME

Percent

Valid EARLY 77.8

LATE 22.2

Total 100.0

PRIORITYVOTING

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

ATTITUDEOFINECTOPWDs

Percent

Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0

pg. 65

ATTITUDEOFELECTORATETOPWDs

Percent

Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0

DISPLAYOFIECMATERIALS

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

1. From the above table, it can be observed that most of the Polling Units observed;

77.8% reported that polling units are located in areas accessible to voters with

disabilities. The same number of polling units also reported that electoral officials

arrived early to conduct elections.

2. All polling units observed; 100% reported the presence of relevant security officials.

3. Most polling units observed; 88.9% and 66.7% reported the presence and participation

of voters with disabilities and pregnant women respectively during the 2015 general

elections in Enugu State. However, all polling units reported the presence of elderly

voters.

4. Most polling units observed; 77.8% reported early commencement of accreditation of

voters.

5. All polling units observed; 100% reported strict compliance of electoral officials to

INEC's policy on "Priority Voting.‖

6. All polling units observed; 100% reported that the attitude of both electoral officials

and non-disabled electorates was "responsive" towards voters with disabilities and

other vulnerable voters.

7. All polling units observed; 100% reported that INEC properly and adequately

displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral

materials.

Issues and Trends Analysis

(i) Observations from Enugu state present a report of full compliance with INEC‘s policy

on ―Priority Voting‖ during the presidential and gubernatorial elections. This implied

that the conduct of the 2015 general elections (Presidential, National Assembly,

Gubernatorial and State Assembly) in Enugu state was reasonably inclusive of, and

accessible to marginalized electorates including PWDs, the elderly and pregnant

women respectively.

(ii) This level of full compliance with the policy on priority voting may have positively

influenced the significantly high presence of other enabling factors of inclusive

electoral process including access to polling units; presence of security; early arrival of

electoral officials and commencement of accreditation; as well as responsive attitude

among electoral officials and non-disabled electorates.

(iii) The fact that none of the indicated rated below 70% may have reasonably influenced

the high turn-out of voters with disabilities. This trend may also suggest a high level of

awareness among all stakeholders on issues of inclusive electoral process in the state.

pg. 66

Table 4.7 Observation of the 2015 General Elections in Anambra State

STATE

Valid ANAMBRA

ELECTIONDAY

Valid GENERAL

ACCESSIBILITYTOPU

Percent

Valid NO 5.3

YES 94.7

Total 100.0

ARRIVALOFINECOFFICIALS

Percent

Valid EARLY 81.6

LATE 18.4

Total 100.0

SECURITYATPU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PWDs PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 28.9

YES 71.1

Total 100.0

ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

pg. 67

PREGNANTWOMENPRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 26.3

YES 73.7

Total 100.0

ACCREDITATIONTIME

Percent

Valid EARLY 81.6

LATE 18.4

Total 100.0

PRIORITYVOTING

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

ATTITUDEOFINECTOPWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 7.9

REACTIVE 5.3

RESPONSIVE 86.8

Total 100.0

ATTITUDEOFELECTORATETOPWDs

Percent

Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0

DISPLAYOFIECMATERIALS

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

1. Most of the polling units observed; 94.7% reported that polling units are located in

areas accessible to PWDs.

2. Most of polling units observed; 81.6% reported early arrival of electoral officials.

3. All polling units observed; 100% reported the presence of relevant security officials.

4. Most of the polling units observed; 71.1% and 73.7% reported the presence and

participation of voters with disabilities and pregnant women respectively, while all

polling units had elderly voters.

pg. 68

5. Most polling units observed; 81.6% reported early accreditation of voters.

6. All polling units observed; 100% reported compliance of electoral officials to INEC's

policy of "Priority Voting.‖

7. Most polling units observed; 86.8% reported that the attitude of electoral officials was

"responsive" towards voters with disabilities However, all polling units observed

reported that non-disabled electorates exhibited same attitude.

8. Similarly, all polling units observed; 100% reported that INEC properly and

adequately displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other

electoral materials.

Issues and Trends Analysis

(i) The indicators in the above analysis show that Anambra state offers a generally

conducive atmosphere for the conduct of inclusive and accessible electoral process.

(ii) Besides the 100% rating of compliance to INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting‖, the

level of participation by marginalized voters and the level of public awareness and

responsive attitude among all stakeholders was significantly high.

pg. 69

Table 4.8 Observation of the 2015 General Elections in Niger State

STATE

Valid NIGER

ELECTIONDAY

Valid GENERAL

ACCESSIBILITY TO PU

Percent

Valid NO 14.3

YES 85.7

Total 100.0

ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS

Percent

Valid EARLY

LATE

Total

88.1

11.9

100.0

SECURITY AT PU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PWDs PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 31.0

YES 69.0

Total 100.0

PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 42.9

YES 57.1

Total 100.0

pg. 70

ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

ACCREDITATION TIME

Percent

Valid EARLY 88.1

LATE 11.9

Total 100.0

PRIORITY VOTING

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT

NOT APPLICABLE

RESPONSIVE

Total

2.4

7.1

90.5

100.0

ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWDs

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

1. Most of the polling units observed; 85.7% reported that polling units are located in

areas accessible to voters with disabilities.

2. Most of the polling units observed; 88.1% reported early arrival of electoral officials.

3. All polling units observed; 100% reported the presence of relevant security officials.

pg. 71

4. Majority of polling units observed; 69.0% and 57.1% reported presence and

participation of voters with disabilities and pregnant women respectively. However,

all polling units observed; 100% reported presence of elderly voters.

5. Most of polling units observed; 88.1% reported early commencement of accreditation.

6. All polling units observed; 100% reported compliance with INEC's policy on "Priority

Voting."‖

7. Most of polling units observed; 90.5% reported that the attitude of electoral officials

was "responsive" towards voters with disabilities. However, all polling units observed;

100% reported same attitude among non-disabled electorates.

8. Lastly, all polling units observed; 100% reported that INEC properly and adequately

displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral

materials.

Issues and Trends Analysis

(i) In Niger state, all polling units observed; 100% during the general elections reported

that there was full compliance of electoral officials to INEC‘s policy on ―Priority

Voting.‖ This implied that the conduct of the 2015 general elections (Presidential,

National Assembly, Gubernatorial and State Assembly) in Niger state, was reasonably

inclusive of, and accessible to marginalized electorates including PWDs, the elderly

and pregnant women respectively.

(ii) The state also records a significantly high presence of all other factors (including

accessibility to polling units, responsiveness of polling officials and non-disabled

electorates towards PWDs, etc) required for inclusive elections. However, observation

shows that this impressive trend did not record same proportion of turn-out among

voters with disabilities and pregnant women.

(iii) This trend of barely above average turn-out of voters with disabilities suggests possible

influence of relatively low awareness particularly among persons with disabilities as

well as other prevailing socio-cultural factors.

pg. 72

Table 4.9Observation of the 2015 General Elections in Kaduna State

STATE

Percent

Valid KADUNA 100.0

ELECTIONDAY

Percent

Valid GENERAL 100.0

LGA

Percent

Valid 61.5

HAYIN DA 7.7

KAKURI 7.7

MANDO RO 7.7

MATERA 7.7

ROMI 7.7

Total 100.0

ACCESSIBILITY TO PU

Percent

Valid NO 46.2

YES 53.8

Total 100.0

ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS

Percent

Valid EARLY 69.2

LATE 30.8

Total 100.0

SECURITY AT PU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

pg. 73

PWDs PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 46.2

YES 53.8

Total 100.0

ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 92.3

YES 7.7

Total 100.0

ACCREDITATION TIME

Percent

Valid EARLY 69.2

LATE 30.8

Total 100.0

PRIORITY VOTING

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 23.1

RESPONSIVE 76.9

Total 100.0

pg. 74

ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFER 38.5

RESPONSI 61.5

Total 100.0

DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

1. Only a simple majority of polling units observed; 53.8% reported that polling units are

located in areas accessible to voters with disabilities.

2. Many polling units observed; 69.2% reported early arrival of electoral officials.

3. All poling units observed; 100% reported the presence of relevant security officials.

4. Again, a simple majority of polling units observed; 53.8% reported the participation of

voters with disabilities. However, almost all polling units observed; 92.3% reported the

absence of pregnant women. Elderly voters remain present in all polling units

observed.

5. Majority of polling units observed; 69.2% reported early accreditation of voters.

6. All polling units observed; 100% reported compliance with INEC's policy on "Priority

Voting.‖

7. Most of the polling units observed; 76.9% reported that the attitude of electoral

officials was "responsive" towards voters with disabilities while only a majority of

61.5% reported same attitude on the part of non-disabled electorates.

8. All polling units observed; 100% reported that INEC properly and adequately

displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral

materials

Issues and Trends Analysis

(i) The trend in Kaduna state reveals that all polling units observed; 100% during the

general elections reported that there was full compliance of electoral officials to

INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting.‖ However, further analysis of issues show that the

high level of compliance did not significantly impact on the guaranty of inclusion and

access for marginalized voters especially those with disabilities and pregnant women

in conduct of the 2015 general elections in Kaduna state.

(ii) For instance, critical factors of inclusion like access to polling units; responsive

attitude among electoral officials and non-disabled electorates were not significantly

high; barely hovering between 50% to 75%. This may be responsible for the barely

above average; 60% turn-out of voters with disabilities.

(iii) Again, the socio-cultural factor restricting participation of women in the political

process may have influenced the significantly high absence of pregnant women,

notwithstanding the high turn-out of elderly voters.

(iv) Generally, the level of inclusion and access for voters with disabilities in the electoral

process is quite reasonable and in fair proportion to the barely average presence of

relevant factors of inclusive electoral process. However, this trend also reveals that

pg. 75

high compliance with the policy on priority voting is not sufficient for the guaranty of

inclusive and accessible electoral process in Kaduna state.

pg. 76

Table 4.10 Observation of the 2015 General Elections in Kano State

STATE

Valid KANO

ELECTION DAY

Percent

Valid GENERAL 100.0

ACCESSIBILITYTOPU

Percent

Valid NO 28.6

YES 71.4

Total 100.0

ARRIVALOFINECOFFICIALS

Percent

Valid EARLY 81.0

LATE 19.0

Total 100.0

SECURITYATPU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PWDs PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 14.3

YES 85.7

Total 100.0

ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

pg. 77

PREGNANTWOMENPRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 85.7

YES 14.3

Total 100.0

ACCREDITATIONTIME

Percent

Valid EARLY 76.2

LATE 23.8

Total 100.0

PRIORITYVOTING

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

ATTITUDEOFINECTOPWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 23.8

RESPONSIVE 76.2

Total 100.0

ATTITUDEOFELECTORATETOPWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 19.0

REACTIVE 4.8

RESPONSIVE 76.2

Total 100.0

DISPLAYOFIECMATERIALS

Percent

Valid NO 4.8

YES 95.2

Total 100.0

pg. 78

1. Most of the polling units observed; 71.4% reported that polling units are located in

areas accessible to PWDs.

2. Most polling units observed; 81.0% reported early arrival of electoral officials.

3. All poling units observed; 100% reported the presence of relevant security officials.

4. Most polling units observed; 85.7% reported the presence and participation of voters

with disabilities, while all polling units reported the participation of elderly voter.

However, most polling units; 85.7% reported the absence of pregnant women.

5. Most polling units observed; 76.2% reported the early commencement of accreditation.

6. All polling units observed; 100% reported compliance to INEC's policy on "Priority

Voting.‖

7. Most polling units observed; 76.2% reported that the attitude of electoral officials and

non-disabled voters respectively was "responsive" towards voters with disabilities.

8. Nearly all polling units observed; 95.2% reported that INEC properly and adequately

displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral

materials.

Issues and Trends Analysis

(i) The analysis of Kano state show that besides the compliance of all election officials to

INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting‖, other indicators and requirements for inclusive

and accessible electoral process were significantly present. However, Kano state

followed a similar trend in other northern states of very low turn-out of pregnant

women

pg. 79

Table4.11Observation of the 2015 Presidential and National Assembly Elections in

Jigawa State.

STATE

Percent

Valid JIGAWA 100.0

ELECTIONDAY

Percent

Valid PRESIDENTIAL 100.0

LGA

Percent

Valid ANYO 5.9

BATRI KA 5.9

DUTSA 5.9

GURU TOW 5.9

HADEJIA 17.6

JAHUN 11.8

KANGAMA 5.9

KHAWA 5.9

KIRIKA S 5.9

KIYAMA 5.9

MIGA 5.9

RINGIM 11.8

UNGUWAR 5.9

Total 100.0

POLLINGUNIT

Percent

Valid ALBASHI 5.9

ANYO FAD 5.9

BADURA P 5.9

BAKIN KA 5.9

BIRNIWA 5.9

HADEJIA 5.9

KACHA WA 5.9

MANTAFAR 5.9

PU 002 5.9

pg. 80

PU 008 5.9

RAMFA PU 11.8

SHAMARIN 5.9

WARD 006 11.8

WARD 09 5.9

WARD PU 5.9

Total 100.0

ACCESSIBILITY TO PU

Percent

Valid NO 11.8

YES 88.2

Total 100.0

ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS

Percent

Valid EARLY 100.0

SECURITY AT PU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PWDs PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 88.2

YES 11.8

Total 100.0

ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

pg. 81

PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 100.0

ACCREDITATION TIME

Percent

Valid EARLY 100.0

PRIORITY VOTING

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 17.6

RESPONSIVE 82.4

Total 100.0

ATTITUDE OF OTHER ELECTORATE TO PWD

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 17.6

RESPONSIVE 82.4

Total 100.0

DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS

Percent

Valid NO 5.9

YES 94.1

Total 100.0

1. Most polling units observed; 88.2% reported that polling units are located in areas

accessible to voters with disabilities.

2. All polling units observed; 100% reported early arrival of electoral officials as well as the

presence of relevant security officials respectively.

3. Most polling units observed; 88.2% reported the absence of voters with disabilities. There

were elderly voters in all polling units observed, while all polling units also recorded no

turn-out of pregnant women.

pg. 82

4. All polling units observed; 100% reported early accreditation of voters. Same was the

case with compliance with INEC's policy on "Priority Voting.‖

5. Most polling units observed; 82.4% reported that attitude of electoral officials and non-

disabled electorates respectively were "responsive" towards voters with disabilities.

6. Nearly all polling units observed; 94.1% reported that INEC properly and adequately

displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral

materials.

7. The above analysis of the presidential and national assembly elections in Jigawa state

indicate a significantly high presence of all relevant factors of inclusive electoral process.

However, there is equally a significantly low level of turn—out of voters with disabilities

and pregnant women.

pg. 83

Table 4.12 Observation of the 2015 Gubernatorial and State Assembly Elections in

Jigawa State

STATE

Percent

Valid JIGAWA 100.0

ELECTIONDAY

Percent

Valid GUBERNATORIAL 100.0

LGA

Percent

Valid WARD 001 4.3

WARD 002 4.3

WARD 003 4.3

WARD 004 8.7

WARD 005 8.7

WARD 006 4.3

WARD 007 8.7

WARD 008 8.7

WARD 009 4.3

WARD 01 8.7

WARD 010 4.3

WARD 011 8.7

WARD 03 8.7

WARD 06 4.3

WARD 08 4.3

WARD 09 4.3

Total 100.0

POLLING UNIT

Percent

Valid PU 002 13.0

PU 003 13.0

PU 006 13.0

PU 007 4.3

PU 008 4.3

PU 009 4.3

PU 01 8.7

pg. 84

PU 010 8.7

PU 012 4.3

PU 04 8.7

PU 05 4.3

PU 08 4.3

PU 6 4.3

PU 8 4.3

Total 100.0

ACCESSIBILITY TO PU

Percent

Valid NO 87.0

YES 13.0

Total 100.0

ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS

Percent

Valid EARLY 100.0

SECURITY AT PU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PWDs PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 87.0

YES 13.0

Total 100.0

ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

pg. 85

PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 100.0

ACCREDITATION TIME

Percent

Valid EARLY 100.0

PRIORITY VOTING

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 39.1

RESPONSIVE 60.9

Total 100.0

ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 39.1

RESPONSIVE 60.9

Total 100.0

DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

1. The above table reveals that most of the polling units observed; 87% reported that

polling units are located in areas not accessible to voters with disabilities.

2. All polling units observed; 100% reported early arrival of electoral officials as well as

the presence of relevant security officials…

3. Most of the polling units observed; 87% reported no turn-out of voters with

disabilities, while all polling units observed; 100% also reported no turn-out of

pregnant women. However, all polling units observed; 100% reported presence and

participation of elderly voters.

4. Again, all polling units observed; 100% reported early commencement of accreditation

and strict compliance with INEC's policy on "Priority Voting" respectively.

pg. 86

5. Majority of polling units observed; 60.9% reported that the attitude of electoral

officials and non-disabled electorates was "responsive" towards voters with

disabilities.

6. All polling units observed; 100%reportted that INEC properly and adequately

displayed posters is containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral

materials.

7. The above analysis of the Gubernatorial and state assembly elections in Jigawa state

reveals a significantly low turn-out of voters with disabilities and pregnant women.

This may be due to the near absence of accessible polling units in spite of the high

presence of other factors which are expected to enhance inclusive and accessible

electoral process.

Issues and Trends Analysis

(i) In Jigawa state, a significantly high number of polling units observed during the

general elections reported that there was full compliance of electoral officials to

INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting.‖ However, there is no consistency as to the impact

or influence of this factor on the turn-out of voters with disabilities and pregnant

women especially where the presence of accessible polling units is not also constant

across the state in spite of the high presence of other factors which promote inclusive

electoral process. This implied that the conduct of the 2015 general elections

(Presidential, National Assembly, Gubernatorial and State Assembly) in Jigawa state

were reasonably inclusive of, and accessible to marginalized electorates including

PWDs, the elderly and pregnant women respectively.

(ii) Again, the observable trend here is that the compliance with priority voting policy and

the high number of accessible polling units notwithstanding, the significantly low turn-

out of voters with disabilities and pregnant women during the presidential election may

have been influenced by low awareness and unfavourable socio-cultural practices. On

the other hand, the persistence in low turn-out of voters with disabilities and pregnant

women during the gubernatorial elections may not be completely divorced from the

high prevalence of inaccessible polling units.

(iii) The persistence in low turn-out of voters with disabilities and pregnant women for the

general elections in Jigawa state highlights the point that all factors which promote

inclusive and accessible electoral process are relevant, significant and must be

adequately present for the successful conduct of inclusive election.

pg. 87

Table 4.13 Observation of the 2015 General Elections in Yobe State

STATE

Percent

Valid YOBE 100.0

ELECTIONDAY

Percent

Valid GENERAL 100.0

ACCESSIBILITYTOPU

Percent

Valid NO 15.4

YES 84.6

Total 100.0

ARRIVALOFINECOFFICIALS

Percent

Valid EARLY 82.1

LATE 17.9

Total 100.0

SECURITYATPU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PWDs PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 28.2

YES 71.8

Total 100.0

ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PREGNANTWOMENPRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 25.6

YES 74.4

Total 100.0

pg. 88

ACCREDITATIONTIME

Percent

Valid EARLY 82.1

LATE 17.9

Total 100.0

PRIORITYVOTING

Percent

Valid NO 2.6

YES 97.4

Total 100.0

ATTITUDEOFINECTOPWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 2.6

RESPONSIVE 97.4

Total 100.0

ATTITUDEOFELECTORATETOPWDs

Percent

Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0

DISPLAYOFIECMATERIALS

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

1. Most polling units observed; 84.6% reported that polling units are located in areas

accessible to voters with disabilities.

2. Most polling units observed; 82.1% reported early arrival of electoral officials.

3. All polling units observed; 100% reported the presence of relevant security officials.

4. Most polling units observed; 71.8% and 74.4% reported the presence and participation

of voters with disabilities and pregnant women respectively. However, all polling units

reported the presence of elderly voters.

5. Most polling units observed; 82.1% reported early commencement of accreditation.

6. Nearly all polling units observed; 97.4% reported compliance with INEC's policy on

"Priority Voting.‖

7. Again, nearly all polling units observed; 97.4% reported that the attitude of electoral

officials was "responsive" towards voters with disabilities. However, all polling units

observed reported same attitude among non-disabled electorates.

pg. 89

8. Lastly, all polling units observed; 100% reported that INEC properly and adequately

displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral

materials.

Issues and Trends Analysis

(i) Yobe State presents a case of near total compliance with INEC‘s policy on ―Priority

Voting‖ and a generally high presence of other requirements of inclusive and

accessible electoral process.

(ii) Despite the challenges of insecurity (insurgence) in the state, a significantly high turn-

out of voters with disabilities and pregnant women was reported. This trend calls to

question earlier assumptions that low turn-out of this category of voters may have been

influenced by socio-cultural beliefs which restricted participation of women in socio-

political activities. Nonetheless, the trend shows a situation of reasonably high level of

awareness among all stakeholders.

pg. 90

Table 4.14 Observation of the 2015 General Elections in Zamfara State

STATE

Percent

Valid ZAMFARA 100.0

ELECTIONDAY

Percent

Valid GENERAL 100.0

ACCESSIBILITYTOPU

Percent

Valid NO 13.3

YES 86.7

Total 100.0

ARRIVALOFINECOFFICIALS

Percent

Valid EARLY 80.0

LATE 20.0

Total 100.0

SECURITYATPU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PWDs PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 20.0

YES 80.0

Total 100.0

ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PREGNANTWOMENPRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 13.3

YES 86.7

Total 100.0

pg. 91

ACCREDITATIONTIME

Percent

Valid EARLY 80.0

LATE 20.0

Total 100.0

PRIORITYVOTING

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

ATTITUDEOFINECTOPWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 6.7

REACTIVE 13.3

RESPONSIVE 80.0

Total 100.0

ATTITUDEOFELECTORATETOPWDs

Percent

Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0

DISPLAYOFIECMATERIALS

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

1. Most polling units observed; 86.7% reported that polling units are located in areas

accessible to voters with disabilities.

2. Most polling units observed; 80.0% reported early arrival of electoral officials.

3. All polling units observed; 100% reported presence of relevant security officials.

4. Most polling units observed; 80.0% and 86.7% reported the presence and participation

of voters with disabilities and pregnant women respectively, while all polling units

reported presence and participation of elderly voters.

5. Most polling units observed; 80.0% reported early commencement of accreditation.

6. All polling units observed; 100% reported compliance with INEC's policy on "Priority

Voting.‖

7. Most polling units observed; 80.0% reported that the attitude of electoral officials was

"responsive" towards voters with disabilities, while all polling units reported same

attitude among non-disabled electorates.

pg. 92

8. All polling units observed; 100% reported that INEC properly and adequately

displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral

materials.

Issues and Trends Analysis

(i) Analysis in Zamfara state shows 100% compliance with INEC‘s policy on ―Priority

Voting‖ as well as a significantly high presence of other requirements of inclusive and

accessible electoral process.

(ii) Zamfara state also presents very high turn-out of voters with disabilities and pregnant

women respectively. Again, this trend defy earlier suggestions that low turn-out of

these same category of voters may have been influenced by socio-cultural

circumstances which discourages women participation in political activities. However,

the situation in the state suggests appreciable levels of awareness among stakeholders.

pg. 93

4.2.1 General Summary

1. The level of accessibility of voters with disabilities to polling units was reasonably

high; ranging between 50% to 90% of the observed polling units in the 10 states.

2. Between 60% to 100% of polling units observed in 10 states reported early arrival of

electoral officials and commencement of accreditation respectively.

3. In terms of security, between 80% to 100% of polling units observed reported

presence of relevant security officials; meaning that voters with disabilities, women

and other vulnerable electorates did not have to worry about safety and security.

4. Observations revealed that between 50% to 100% of observed polling units reported

presence and participation of voters with disabilities in 9 states. However, only Jigawa

state recorded the lowest turn-out.

5. Similarly, participation of pregnant women was observed in 50% to 90% of polling

units in 7 states, while 3 states, comprising Jigawa, Kaduna and Kano recorded less

than 50%

6. All the polling units observed in the 10 states reported the presence and Participation

of elderly voters.

7. Virtually all polling units observed in the 10 states recorded full compliance with

INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting.‖ In addition, election materials including voter

education and information materials were displayed in accessible forms in all polling

units. This signifies a reasonable form of institutionalized recognition of inclusion and

access as key issues in the conduct of elections in Nigeria.

8. Between 50% to 100% of polling units observed in the 10 states reported that the

attitude of both electoral officials and non-disabled electorates was ―responsive‖

towards voters with disabilities, pregnant women and elderly voters respectively. This

trend can be interpreted to mean an appreciable level of awareness and acceptance of

issues of inclusion by key stakeholders in the electoral process.

9. Finally, The trends observed in the polling units in the 10 states show a reasonable

level of inclusion and access for voters with disabilities, pregnant women and elderly

voters; appreciable level of awareness among stakeholders; and a fair demonstration

of commitment to institutionalize necessary policy framework required for the

implementation of inclusive and accessible electoral process in the 2015 general

elections.

pg. 94

4.3 Zonal Analysis

Table 4.15 Northwest

STATE

Percent

JIGAWA 44.9

KADUNA 14.6

KANO 23.6

ZAMFARA

Total

16.9

100.0

ELECTION DAY

Valid GENERAL

ACCESSIBILITY TO PU

Percent

Valid NO 40.4

YES

Total

59.6

100.0

ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS

Percent

Valid EARLY 87.6

LATE

Total

12.4

100.0

SECURITY AT PU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PWDs PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 52.8

YES

Total

47.2

100.0

pg. 95

ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 80.9

YES

Total

19.1

100.0

ACCREDITATION TIME

Percent

Valid EARLY 86.5

LATE

Total

13.5

100.0

PRIORITY VOTING

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 23.6

REACTIVE 2.2

RESPONSIVE

Total

74.2

100.0

ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 23.6

REACTIVE 1.1

RESPONSIVE

Total

75.3

100.0

pg. 96

DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS

Percent

Valid NO 2.2

YES

Total

97.8

100.0

1. Only a simple majority of polling units observed in the northwest; 59.6% reported that

polling units are located in areas accessible to voters with disabilities.

2. Most polling units observed in the northwest; 87.6% reported early arrival of electoral

officials.

3. All observed polling units in the northwest reported the presence of relevant security

officials.

4. Only few polling units observed in the northwest; 47.2% reported the presence and

participation of voters with disabilities. A lower percentage; 19.1% of pregnant women

turned-out for the general elections. However, elderly voters were present in all polling

units in the northwest.

5. Most polling units observed in the northwest; 86.5% reported early commencement of

accreditation.

6. All polling units observed in the northwest reported compliance with INEC'S policy on

"Priority Voting.‖

7. Most polling units observed in the northwest; 74.2% and 75.3% reported that the

attitude of electoral officials and non-disabled electorates respectively was

"responsive" towards voters with disabilities.

8. Nearly all polling units observed in the northwest; 97.8% reported that INEC properly

and adequately displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and

other electoral materials.

Issues and Trends Analysis

(I) Although the indicators from analysis of the northwest show a significantly high

presence of virtually all requirements of an inclusive and accessible electoral process,

the very low turn-out of voters with disabilities and pregnant women could be an

indication of low awareness among voters with disabilities.

pg. 97

Table 4.16 Northeast

STATE

Valid YOBE

ELECTION DAY

Valid GENERAL

ACCESSIBILITY TO PU

Percent

Valid NO 15.4

YES

Total

84.6

100.0

ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS

Percent

Valid EARLY 82.1

LATE

Total

17.9

100.00

SECURITY AT PU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PWDs PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 28.2

YES

Total

71.8

100.0

ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

pg. 98

PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 25.6

YES

Total

74.4

100.0

ACCREDITATION TIME

Percent

Valid EARLY 82.1

LATE

Total

17.9

100.0

PRIORITY VOTING

Percent

Valid NO 2.6

YES

Total

97.4

100.0

ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 2.6

RESPONSIVE

Total

97.4

100.0

ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWDs

Percent

Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0

DISPLAYOFIECMATERIALS

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

1. Most polling units observed in the northeast; 84.6% reported that polling units are

located in areas accessible to voters with disabilities.

2. Most polling units observed in the northeast; 82.1% reported early arrival of electoral

officials.

3. All polling units observed in the northeast; 100% reported the presence of relevant

security officials.

pg. 99

4. Most polling units observed in the northeast; 71.8% and 74.4% reported the presence

and participation of voters with disabilities and pregnant women respectively.

However, all polling units reported the presence of elderly voters.

5. Most polling units observed in the northeast; 82.1% reported early commencement of

accreditation.

6. Nearly all polling units observed in the northeast; 97.4% reported compliance with

INEC's policy on "Priority Voting.‖

7. Again, nearly all polling units observed in the northeast; 97.4% reported that the

attitude of electoral officials was "responsive" towards voters with disabilities.

However, all polling units observed reported same attitude among non-disabled

electorates.

8. Lastly, all polling units observed in the northeast; 100% reported that INEC properly

and adequately displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and

other electoral materials.

Issues and Trends Analysis

(i) While it may be somewhat insufficient to use the outcome in Yobe state to draw

inferences on the trend in the northeast; especially considering the security challenges

in the area, it is also not impossible that same situation may prevail across the area. As

such, the northeast presents a case of near total compliance with INEC‘s policy on

―Priority Voting‖ and a generally high presence of other requirements of inclusive and

accessible electoral process.

(ii) Despite the challenges of insecurity (insurgence) in the northeast, a significantly high

turn-out of voters with disabilities and pregnant women was reported. This trend calls

to question earlier assumptions that low turn-out of this category of voters may have

been influenced by socio-cultural beliefs which restricted participation of women in

socio-political activities. Nonetheless, the trend shows a situation of reasonably high

level of awareness among all stakeholders.

pg. 100

Table 4.17 North Central

STATE

Valid NIGER

ELECTION DAY

Valid GENERAL

ACCESSIBILITY TO PU

Percent

Valid NO 14.3

YES

Total

85.7

100.0

ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS

Percent

Valid EARLY 88.1

LATE

Total

11.9

100.0

SECURITY AT PU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PWDs PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 31.0

YES

Total

69.0

100.0

ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

pg. 101

PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 42.9

YES

Total

57.1

100.0

ACCREDITATION TIME

Percent

Valid EARLY 88.1

LATE

Total

11.9

100.0

PRIORITY VOTING

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 2.4

NOT APPLICABLE 7.1

RESPONSIVE

Total

90.5

100.0

ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWDs

Percent

Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0

DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

1. Most of the polling units observed in the north-central; 85.7% reported that polling

units are located in areas accessible to voters with disabilities.

2. Most of the polling units observed in the north central; 88.1% reported early arrival of

electoral officials.

3. All polling units observed in the north central; 100% reported the presence of relevant

security officials.

pg. 102

4. Majority of polling units observed in the north central; 69.0% and 57.1% reported

presence and participation of voters with disabilities and pregnant women respectively,

while all polling units observed; 100% reported presence of elderly voters.

5. Most of polling units observed in the north central; 88.1% reported early

commencement of accreditation.

6. All polling units observed in the north central; 100% reported compliance with INEC's

policy on "Priority Voting.‖

7. Most of polling units observed in the north central; 90.5% reported that the attitude of

electoral officials was "responsive" towards voters with disabilities, while all polling

units observed; 100% reported same attitude among non-disabled electorates.

8. Lastly, all polling units observed in the north central; 100% reported that INEC

properly and adequately displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines

and other electoral materials.

Issues and Trends Analysis

(i) Again, we are compelled to adopt the observed trend in Niger state for the north

central. All polling units observed; 100% during the general elections reported that

there was full compliance of electoral officials to INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting.‖

This implied that the conduct of the 2015 general elections was reasonably inclusive

of, and accessible to marginalized electorates including PWDs, the elderly and

pregnant women respectively.

(ii) The north central zone also records a significantly high presence of all other factors

required for inclusive elections. However, observation shows that this impressive trend

did not record same proportion of turn-out among voters with disabilities and pregnant

women. This trend of barely above average turn-out of voters with disabilities suggests

possible influence of relatively low awareness particularly among persons with

disabilities as well as other prevailing socio-cultural factors.

pg. 103

Table 4.18 Southwest

STATE

Percent

Valid LAGOS 62.8

OSUN

Total

37.2

100.0

ELECTION DAY

Valid GENERAL

ACCESSIBILITY TO PU

Percent

Valid NO 18.6

YES

Total

81.4

100.0

ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS

Percent

Valid EARLY 79.1

LATE

Total

20.9

100.0

SECURITY AT PU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PWDs PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 39.5

YES

Total

60.5

Total

ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

pg. 104

PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 62.8

YES

Total

37.2

100.0

ACCREDITATION TIME

Percent

Valid EARLY 76.7

LATE

Total

23.3

100.0

PRIORITY VOTING

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 14.0

NOT APPLICABLE 2.3

RESPONSIVE

Total

83.7

100.0

ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 14.0

REACTIVE 2.3

RESPONSIVE

Total

83.7

100.0

DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS

Percent

Valid NO 7.0

YES

Total

93.0

100.0

1. Most polling units observed in the southwest; 81.4% reported that polling units are

located in areas accessible to voters with disabilities.

pg. 105

2. Most polling units observed in the southwest; 79.1% reported early arrival of electoral

officials.

3. Relevant security officials were present in all polling units observed in the southwest.

4. Majority of polling units observed in the southwest; 60.5% reported the presence of

voters with disabilities, while elderly voters were present in all polling units. However,

a very low turn-out of pregnant women; 37.2% was witnessed in the southwest.

5. Most polling units observed in the southwest; 76.7% reported early commencement of

accreditation.

6. All polling units observed in the southwest reported compliance with INEC's policy on

"Priority Voting.‖

7. Most polling units observed in the southwest 83.7% reported that attitude of electoral

officials and non-disabled voters respectively were "responsive" towards voters with

disabilities.

8. Nearly all polling units observed in the southwest 93.0% reported that INEC properly

and adequately displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and

other electoral materials.

Issues and Trend Analysis

(i) Observations in the southwest reveal that the key requirements for inclusive and

accessible electoral process; including compliance with INEC's policy on "Priority

Voting" was significantly present. However this is not justified by the fairly above

average turn-out of voters with disabilities in the zone.

pg. 106

Table 4.19 Southeast

STATE

Percent

Valid ANAMBRA 80.9

ENUGU

Total

19.1

100.0

ELECTION DAY

Valid GENERAL

ACCESSIBILITY TO PU

Percent

Valid NO 8.5

YES

Total

91.5

100.0

ARRIVAL OF INEC OFFICIALS

Percent

Valid EARLY 80.9

LATE

Total

19.1

100.0

SECURITY AT PU

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

PWDs PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 25.5

YES

Total

74.5

100.0

ELDERLY VOTERS PRESENT

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

pg. 107

PREGNANT WOMEN PRESENT

Percent

Valid NO 27.7

YES

Total

72.3

100.0

ACCREDITATION TIME

Percent

Valid EARLY 80.9

LATE

Total

19.1

100.0

PRIORITYVOTING

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

ATTITUDE OF INEC TO PWDs

Percent

Valid INDIFFERENT 6.4

REACTIVE 4.3

RESPONSIVE

Total

89.4

100.0

ATTITUDE OF ELECTORATE TO PWDs

Percent

Valid RESPONSIVE 100.0

DISPLAY OF IEC MATERIALS

Percent

Valid YES 100.0

1. Most polling units observed in the southeast; 91.5% reported that polling units are

located in areas accessible to voters with disabilities.

2. Most polling units observed in the southeast; 80.9% reported early arrival of electoral

officials.

3. All polling units observed in the southeast reported presence of relevant security

officials.

4. Most polling units observed in the southeast; 74.5% and 72.3% reported presence of

voters with disabilities and pregnant women respectively, while elderly voters were

present in all polling units.

pg. 108

5. Most polling units observed in the southeast; 80.9% reported early commencement of

accreditation.

6. All polling units observed in the southeast reported compliance with INEC's policy on

"Priority Voting.‖

7. Most polling units observed in the southeast; 89.4% reported that the attitude of

electoral officials was "responsive" towards voters with disabilities. However,

electorates in all polling units observed reported same attitude.

8. All polling units observed in the southeast reported that INEC properly and adequately

displayed posters containing voting procedures and guidelines and other electoral

materials.

Issues and Trends Analysis

(i) Reports from the southeast show a significantly high presence of key requirements of

inclusive and accessible electoral process including compliance with INEC's policy on

"Priority Voting." There is also an appreciably high turn-out of marginalized voters

including those with disabilities, pregnant women and the elderly; while the high level

of awareness among stakeholders is demonstrated through the "responsive" attitude of

electoral officials and non-disabled electorates.

4.3.1 General Summary

1. There is no significant disparity among the geo-political zones in terms of

accessibility to polling units as 4 of the 5 zones reported more than 80% polling units

in areas accessible to voters with disabilities. However, the northwest recorded the

lowest; less than 60%

2. Report from the 5 geo-political zones indicates early arrival of electoral officials and

commencement of accreditation. This trend may have encouraged the fairly high turn-

out of voters in general especially those with disabilities, pregnant women and the

elderly.

3. Reports from the 5 geo-political zones indicate that security was guaranteed in all

observed polling units.

4. With respect to the presence and participation of voters with disabilities, the observed

trend across the 5 geo-political zones show that while the northwest recorded the

lowest; below 50%, other zones reported higher levels of turn-out; ranging between

60% to 80%

5. The turn-out of pregnant women for the general elections was significantly low in the

northwest and southwest; recording turn-out of 19.1% and 37.2% respectively.

However, other zones recorded turn-outs ranging between 50% and 80%.

6. Turn-out of elderly voters was significantly high in all the geo-political zones.

7. Reports from the 5 geo-political zones indicate that all polling units observed

complied with INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting.‖

8. Across the 5 geo-political zones, not less than 70% of electoral officials and non-

disabled electorates demonstrated ―responsive‖ attitude towards voters with

disabilities and other marginalized voters. This trend implies a significantly high level

of awareness among stakeholders on issues of inclusion.

9. Virtually all polling units observed in the 5 geo-political zones reported that electoral

officials ensured inclusion and access in the provision and use of electoral materials

including voter education materials. This trend may have enhanced the level of

awareness on issues of inclusion among stakeholders during the general elections.

pg. 109

10. Generally, it is observed that there are no significant gaps or disparities between and

among the 5 geo-political zones as far as the mainstreaming of inclusivity and

accessibility issues in the conduct of the 2015 general elections is concerned.

pg. 110

Chapter 5

MAJOR FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND

RECCCOMMENDATION

5.1 Major Findings

Based on the observation of the 2015 general elections conducted in 10 states across 5 geo-

political zones in Nigeria, and the outcome of desk review of relevant literature, the following

constitute major findings which should be considered for action:

1. Existing electoral legislative and policy frameworks including the 1999 Constitution,

the Electoral Act 2010 and INEC‘s Strategic Plan for 2012-2016 are found to be

grossly insufficient and incapable of effectively promoting inclusive and accessible

electoral process in Nigeria.

2. As observed in the 2015 general elections, the level of public awareness and

enlightenment on issues of inclusive electoral process in Nigeria is only fairly high.

However, it is grossly insufficient to elicit appropriate positive attitude and response

of the general public towards issues of inclusive electoral process.

3. There is inadequate attention, contribution and commitment of relevant scholars,

professionals, development agencies and other stakeholders towards research and

development of inclusive electoral process in Nigeria.

4. There is general lack of technical capacity on the part of EMBs, political parties, the

media, the Legislature, security agencies, CSOs and DPOs, as well as PWDs

themselves on issues and practices in inclusive electoral process.

5. There is no disability data base (DDB) with regard to management and administrative

logistics and planning for the implementation of inclusive electoral process.

6. The fairly high turn-out of voters with disabilities, elderly voters and women

(including pregnant women) in the 2015 general elections demonstrate their

willingness and capacity to effectively participate in an inclusive and accessible

electoral process once all technical, institutional, human and infrastructural

requirements are met.

7. Implementation of INEC‘s policy on ―Priority Voting‖ is encouraging going by the

level of compliance observed. However, some observed trends suggest that this is not

sufficient to guaranty an inclusive electoral process.

8. Observations reveal that the level of accessibility to polling units, electoral/voting

materials such as ballot papers for the blind; sing language interpretation for the deaf;

physical access for the physically challenged and simplified information for the

intellectually disabled are still very far-fetched in the attainment of inclusive and

accessible electoral process in Nigeria.

9. It was observed that political parties, the media, and mainstream CSOs lack capacity

and courage to support interested PWDs to stand for elections at any level.

pg. 111

10. It was also observed that the level of violence before, during and after elections as

well as intimidation by security officials are still significantly high to discourage

effective participation of PWDs, the elderly and women in the political process

5.2 Conclusion

In the electoral history of Nigeria, the conduct of the 2015 general elections can be said to be

the most sensitive to issues of disability, gender and social inclusion; especially considering

the significant success recorded in the historic production of voter and civic education

materials in inclusive and accessible formats for PWDs, and the implementation of the INEC

policy on ―Priority Voting.‖ This success is largely attributable to the strategic, systematic

and constructive partnership and engagement between the DPAI and LACSOP-lead CSO

sector and the Independent National Electoral Commission.

The impressive outcomes of the 2015 general elections with regard to inclusion and access

for PWDs; typified by high turn-out of voters with disabilities, women and elderly voters, and

a reasonable level of awareness and responsive attitude by electoral officials and non-

disabled electorates towards vulnerable voters are clear indications of new thresholds in

Nigeria‘s electoral history which is brought about by new approaches in citizens-lead

processes of organized and constructive demand for policy and accountability from their

elected leaders.

Accordingly, these outcomes validate the possibility of institutionalizing an inclusive

electoral process in Nigeria in line with global standards and best practices. The outcomes

also validate the efficacy of the DPAI and LACSOP-lead advocacy approaches and methods

both for scale-up towards a more national outlook in Nigeria, and for replication and

application in other jurisdictions and sectors.

DPAI, LACSOP and indeed other critical stakeholders are hopeful that all inclusivity and

accessibility requirements for persons with disabilities, women and the elderly are adequately

provided in subsequent elections in Nigeria.

5.3 Recommendations

The conduct of an inclusive and accessible electoral process requires an ―inclusive‖

approach; meaning that all stakeholders need to work inclusively; in partnership with each

other. However, it is important that each stakeholder clearly understands its strategic roles

and responsibilities. This understanding informed the structural outline of these

recommendations.

5.3.1 The Role of Media Organizations

Based on observed findings, the following recommendations are proposed as interventions

for the media:

1. Media programmes should contribute towards raising awareness of the UN

Convention on Rights of Persons With Disabilities (UNCRPD), the 1999 constitution,

the 2010 electoral act and other relevant laws, policies and regulations which promote

the rights of persons with disabilities among all persons involved in election

pg. 112

administration and monitoring, and campaign for polling station officers to allow

persons with disabilities exercise their right to vote with the greatest possible

autonomy.

2. Media organizations (print and electronic) should allocate specific quota (space and

time) to issue of inclusive elections

3. Media organizations should devote resources towards training their personnel on

coverage and reporting participation, inclusion and accessibility of PWDs in all

elections.

4. Ensure that political broadcast debates are captioned, provided with audio description

and translated into sign language.

5. The Nigerian Broadcasting Commission (NBC) should review the code of broadcast

ethics to effectively mainstream and promote inclusion and accessibility for PWDs

while ensuring compliance by media organizations.

6. Media programmes should contribute to awareness rising that polling stations have

accessible polling booths that ensure voter independence and privacy, including for all

persons with disabilities.

7. Media programmes should contribute to awareness rising on the use of inclusive and

accessible campaign venues and materials by candidates, political parties, federations,

coalitions, groups of voters, broadcast and television companies and radio stations

(publicly and privately owned).

8. Media organizations should ensure that, for the hearing impaired, electoral advertising

transmitting television advertisements contains captioning (CC1 system) and/or sign

language content of the ad content. For persons with visual impairments, Braille

ballots and templates should be used. For persons with intellectual disabilities, simple

language and info-graphics should be used.

9. Media programmes should promote civic and voter education for children and young

persons with disabilities.

10. Media programmes should encourage persons with disabilities to participate in the

activities and administration of political parties.

11. Media programmes should support awareness raising that person with disabilities who

are traditionally more discriminated against, such as persons with psychosocial or

intellectual disabilities, have equal opportunities to form and belong to representative

and other civil society organizations.

12. Media programmes should support Campaign that girls and women with disabilities

are enabled to participate in leadership roles in education, and support programs

targeted to build their capacity to participate in political life as candidates for election.

13. Media organizations should publish a yearly report of their activities on inclusive

election.

5.3.2 The Role of Security Agencies

Based on observed findings, the following recommendations are proposed as interventions by

security agencies:

1. Training of security personnel on all aspect of inclusive electoral policies and

processes

2. Ensure that persons with disabilities can register to vote and do so without

intimidation, fraud, coercion, or inducement.

3. Security personnel should ensure professionalism without bias to any group or interest

in a manner that over heat the process and breeds lack of confidence

pg. 113

4. Develop a code of conduct manual for security agencies on elections day with

particular emphasize on inclusive elections

5. To breed confidence and make the elections day more participatory, there should be a

public awareness on the channels of authority of the various security personnel as it

breeds accountability

6. In event of violence on election day security personnel should be sensitized to cater to

the safety of PWDs, elderly and pregnant women as priority

7. Protect the election process by keeping peace before, during and after Election Day

8. Allow persons with disabilities to vote with an assistant of their choice in keeping

with CRPD, whether a family member, friend, polling worker, or other person.

5.3.3 The Role of National and State Legislatures

Based on observed findings, the following recommendations are proposed as interventions by

national and state Legislature:

1. The principles of priority voting and other inclusive electoral practices should be

given legislative backing.

2. The United Nation Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disability should be

domesticated through appropriate Acts and Laws of the National and State Legislature

respectively.

3. There should be consultations with PWDs in enacting any law that have bearing on

the electoral process.

4. Enact laws that will promote effective participation of PWDs in the electoral process.

5. The legislature should work in conjunction with the executive to enact comprehensive

disability legislation.

6. The 1999 constitution should be amended to provide for the specific electoral needs

of persons with disabilities.

7. The legislature should review and revise accessibility and voter assistance provisions

in the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) and regulations in the light of non-

discrimination against all persons with disabilities.

8. The legislature should conduct it‘s over sight functions to ensure that every aspect of

the electoral process is truly inclusive of persons with disabilities.

9. The legislature should unbundle INEC from too many responsibilities to enable it

deliver a truly inclusive and accessible electoral process.

5.3.4 The Role of Local and International Development Agencies

Based on observed findings, the following recommendations are proposed as interventions by

Local and International Development Agencies:

1. Embark on comprehensive assessment of the status of inclusiveness and

accessibility of the electoral process in Nigeria by reviewing available reports and

other documented case studies.

2. Identify relevant stakeholders for the purpose of partnership and support.

3. Facilitate interaction and engagement between stakeholders

4. Support advocacy on the essence of inclusion and accessibility for PWDs in the

electoral process.

5. Provide technical assistance to relevant stakeholders to reduce or eradicate gaps

which hinder electoral inclusivity and accessibility.

6. Develop effective monitoring system to identify and track inclusivity and

accessibility situations and needs of persons with disabilities.

pg. 114

7. Support relevant agencies including INEC to commission a study on census of

PWDs in the country with a view to developing a reliable data base for electoral

and other relevant purposes.

8. Ensure that all supported projects on the electoral process (and other sect oral

issues) mainstream issues of inclusiveness and accessibility for PWDs.

9. Support key governmental agencies like INEC, security agencies, etc in promoting

inclusiveness in elections.

10. Support non-governmental groups particularly disabled people‘s organizations

(especially the Joint National Association of Persons with Disabilities

JONAPWD), mainstream CSOs, etc in inclusive electoral process interventions.

11. Increase funding to support advocacies for inclusive electoral process.

12. Provide technical assistance to:

Legislators to mainstream issues of disability and social inclusion in

legislations and other legislative functions.

Disability group CSOs to create more awareness on issues of inclusiveness

Political parties to mainstream inclusivity and accessibility of PWDs in their

structures and processes

PWDs vying for electoral offices

5.3.5 The Role of Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)

Based on observed findings, the following recommendations are proposed as interventions by

the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC):

Article 29 requires that all Contracting States protect

"the right of persons with disabilities to vote by secret ballot

in elections and public referendums”.

According to this provision, each Contracting State should provide for voting equipment

which would enable disabled voters to vote independently and secretly.

Right to vote in the CRPD

INEC is required to Develop and implement a policy on inclusive electoral process which

should include

1. Capturing of disabilities status of electorate during registration

2. Mapping of all polling units to identify and relocate inaccessible ones to new

accessible points.

3. Provision of accessible voting materials including voting cubicles, boxes and ballot

papers.

4. Review of the accreditation and voting process to occur simultaneously to encourage

more participation of PWDs.

5. To diligently prosecute electoral offenders towards reducing violence and enhancing

participation of all.

6. Training of all INEC permanent and adhoc staff on inclusive and accessible election

7. Mainstream inclusivity and accessibility in the conduct of all civic and voters

education activities.

8. Provision of accessible venues, accessible voter‘s materials, sign language interpreters

etc.

pg. 115

9. Design a template to monitor political party‘s compliance level of inclusivity and

accessibility stands.

10. Strengthening ongoing inclusive electoral processes by INEC

5.3.6 The Role of Political Parties

Based on observed findings, the following recommendations are proposed as interventions by

all political parties:

1. Political parties should develop and implement policies on inclusive electoral process

in line with existing legal and policy framework as it affects Nigeria.

2. Political parties should make provision for qualified persons with disabilities to fill

dedicated quota in terms of party employees, officers and candidates

3. Capturing of data on disabilities status of party members during party registration.

4. Train party agents, party staff and members on inclusive elections

5. Mainstream inclusivity and accessibility in the conduct of all political campaigns,

rallies and meetings by providing an accessible venues, podiums, accessible voters

materials, sign language interpreters etc

6. Political party offices, campaign venues and podium to be accessible

7. Establish a disability desk.

8. Annual publication of political party‘s compliance level of inclusiveness of PWDs.

pg. 116

APPENDIX A:

SAVI (State Accountability and Voice Initiative)

DFID Funded Programme in Nigeria

ATTENDANCE LIST FOR A 4-DAY REVIEW AND REPORTING DRAFTING SESSION

ON OBSERRVATION OF THE INCLUSION AND ACCESSIBILITY OF PERSONS WITH

DISABILITIES IN THE 2015 GENERAL ELECTION

VENUE: SAVI OFFICE, AGIDINGBI, LAGOS STATE: 8TH MAY 2015

S/N NAME ORGANISATION DESIGNATION SEX E-MAIL PHONE

NUMBER

SIGNATURE

1 Kenny Kuforiji LACSOP Member M kenkuf@yahoo.com 08023085088

2 AbimbolaJunaid Arise Nig. Women

LACSOP

Member F info@arisenigerianwoman.org 08088453707

3 Dr. Adebayo DPAI Director,

Programmes,

Research and

Documentation

M bayo4all@gmail.com 08028974873

4 OmolaraOlusaiye CSO Media

Network

Media Team Lead F omolaraeni@yahoo.com 08060563329

5 Ayo Adebusoye NNNGO/LACSOP Steering Committee

Member

M ayo.nnngo@gmail.com 08037191348

6 Bola Nuga CISHAN

LACSOP

Steering Committee

Member

M bolanuga2002@yahoo.co.uk 08098553702

7 Daniel Onwe DPAI Director of Legal

Services

M danielonwe@yahoo.com 07082079440

8 AdanlawoOlawale PaGG Member M waleadan@yahoo.com 08036545875

9 Uju Peace Okeke LACSOP/C4M C.D F mmaducentre@yahoo.com 08023907137

10 Alao Sunday IRI APO M salao@iri.org 08038906862

pg. 117

S/N NAME ORGANISATION DESIGNATION SEX E-MAIL PHONE

NUMBER

SIGNATURE

11 Rommy Mom SAVI Federal

ProgrammeManager

M rommymom@yahoo.com 08036081967

12 Ayodele Taofiq-

Fanida

CIPOGG/PAPPCC Member M ayodele4peace@yahoo.com 08098746523

13 Kayode Iyalla SAVI State Programme

Officer

M iyalladk@yahoo.ca 08023289267

14 Oluwatoyin

Nwiido

SAVI State Programme

Assistant

F yimikaglory@yahoo.com 08023965236

15 Felix Obanubi SAVI State Team Leader M fbobanubi@yahoo.com 08037176842

pg. 118

APPENDIX B MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR INCLUSIVE AND ACCESSIBLE ELECTORAL PROCESS

GENERAL INCLUSION AND ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS

SN PROVISIONS FOR INCLUSION/ACCESSIBILITY YES NO N/A COMMENTS

1. All relevant laws and policies which guide conduct of elections adequately provide for inclusion and accessibility for PWDs in line with the CRPD and other global best practices

2. All election stakeholders operate internally documented policy on inclusion and accessibility

3. Disability status of eligible voters with disabilities are properly captured during voter registration exercise and during party membership registration exercise respectively

4. Disability Desk is established to monitor effective mainstreaming of inclusive and accessibility practices and processes

5. Qualified PWDs are employed to manage established disability Desks

6. Proper training on how to attend to, and relate with all PWDs is provided for:

(i) Adhoc and permanent staff of INECthe Election Management Body;

(ii) Political party staff and officials; (iii) Security officials; (iv) Journalists and other media

practitioners; (v) Election observers; (vi) PWDs, DPOs and CSOs.

7. Voter and civic education materials including media jingles are produced in inclusive and accessible formats to accommodate all disability needs and types

8. PWDs are invited to participate in (i) all voter and civic education

programmes; (ii) election stakeholders engagement

9. PWDs are given special considerations to participate as;

(i) voters; (ii) election observers; (iii) election candidates; (iv) election media analysts.

pg. 119

10. All infrastructure used in all stages of the electoral process are physically accessible to all PWDs. They include:

(i) polling units/centres; (ii) offices of the Election Management

Body; (iii) Political party offices; (iv) Media offices; (v) Public buildings serving as

government offices; (vi) Places used as campaign and meeting

venues.

11. All buildings/venues, movable objects, voting materials, electoral officials and separate voting queue designated for PWDs are clearly marked and tagged for easy identification

12. PWDs are accompanied by persons of their choice to assist them participate in all electoral activities including:

(i) Voter and civic engagement meetings;

(ii) Political party campaign; (iii) Voter registration; (iv) Voting/ballot casting.

13. Inclusive Election Information Clearing House and Communication Channels are opened to provide help and support to PWDs and DPOs

pg. 120

SPECIFIC DISABILITY INCLUSION AND ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS

SN PROVISIONS FOR INCLUSION/ACCESSIBILITY

YES NO N/A COMMENTS

1. All electoral materials are properly captioned in simple language with proper illustrations. They include:

(i) Political campaign materials;

(ii) Voter and civic education materials;

(iii) Voting materials (including ballot papers and boxes)

2. Election/voting materials are properly captioned in simple language with proper illustrations

3. There is proper marking/labelling of the polling booth, registration desks and other significant places within and around the polling centre

4. Electoral officials are

properly trained (in simple sign language)to provide necessary assistance to deaf persons

5. Professional Sign Language Interpreters are provided at the final collation centre where final results of elections are announced.

A labelled polling station

pg. 121

6. Election/voting materials (ballot papers) are produced in Braille or tactile formats

7. There are no objects or

obstacles on walk ways leading to the polling booth and other immediate surroundings of the polling centre

8. Amputees (Persons without fingers and thumbs) are allowed to use their toes while those without either limbs are allowed to vote with the support of their chosen assistant

9. Gutters or drainages in and around polling units are properly covered with either wooding or concrete slabs to prevent falling

10. Wooding or concrete ramps are provided for wheel chair users to ensure easy accessibility

11. Accessible polling booth

which allow easy entry and exit for wheel chair users is used

12. Polling booth and registration tables are placed in very accessible locations

pg. 122

MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR INCLUSIVE AND ACCESSIBLE ELECTORAL PROCESS

Supported by

pg. 123

APPENDIX C

CITIZENS MANDATE PROTECTION

Media To ensure equal access to and coverage of all competing

political parties and candidates; To present accurate information on parties programmes and

campaigns. To provide fair and informative reporting on the election

process and the elections law; and To educate and enlighten the citizens about their rights and

responsibilities in elections.

CSOs/FBOs/CBOs To monitor/observe the electoral processes including the

Election activities. Advocate and lobby for appropriate electoral laws to guide

the conduct of elections. To raise awareness of citizens to vote and protect their

votes.

Political Parties Ensure that the party constitutions are widely disseminated

among members and that the provisions of the constitutions are respected.

Practice internal democracy in all areas of their operations, particularly in the selection of party leaders and the nomination of candidates for elections.

Establish independent and credible processes for resolving disputes.

Facilitate participation of marginalized groups including women, persons with disabilities and youths in the political process through the application of affirmative action policies and practices.

Judiciary

Administer the oath of office to elected officials,

Address election petitions through judicial means,

Ensure justice through fair hearing and quick dispensation of cases.

Traditional/religious group

To enlighten their members on the right to vote.

Play a major role in promoting the culture of free and fair elections.

Commit to devote time, energy and resources to the

MANDATE

PROTECTION

FACT SHEET

THIS MESSAGE IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE LAGOS STATE CIVIL

SOCIETY PARTNERSHIP (LACSOP) WITH SUPPORT FROM THE STATE

ACCOUNTABILITY AND VOICE INITIATIVE (SAVI)/DFID

How to protect your mandate?

1. Know parties manifestos, statement

and constitution

2. Report incidence of electoral malpractices to police, media, and other interest groups

3. Encourage the next person to register and vote

4. Use of FOI Act to access information and protect electoral integrity

5. identify and engage with existing institutions/organizations with same ideology

6. Build relationship with law enforcement agencies

7. Introduce and organize community Poll Mandate Watchers (PMW) to observe elections process within their community.

Collect Evidence and Base Your Reports on Facts When you experience or witness

electoral malpractice and fraud during

the electoral process, it is important to

report such incidents to the appropriate

authority and to the media. It is equally

important that you base your complaint

or report on detailed facts and that you

have evidence ready if possible. Video

cameras, tape recorders, and even the

cameras on your mobile phones can be

useful tools to document incidents.

Otherwise, statements made by

witnesses to a situation can also serve

as evidence of electoral misconduct.

ABOUT LACSOP

The Lagos State Civil Society

Partnership (LACSOP) is a platform of

major civil society networks and

coalitions working with the Lagos state

Government – the executive as well as

the legislature, for the effective

implementation of critical development

issues.

LACSOP’s focus areas include:

Improved voice and accountability in governance

Support better service delivery at the LGA level

Support to participatory legislative process in Lagos State

HELP LINE: 0909 1987409

Email: info@lacsop.org

Facebook: www.facebook/LACSOP

Twitter: @LACSOP

MANDATE PROTECTION TEAM

Barr. Adebusoye Ayo Vivian Emesowum Dr. Adebayo A. S AbimbolaJunaid OmolaraOlusaiye Ayodele Taofiq-Fanida Olusola Babalola Hannah Boshen Adotse Samuel

GRAPHIC DESIGN BY GRASSROOT PEOPLE AND GENDER DEVELOPMENT CENTER

pg. 124

What is Democracy?

In the simplest sense, Democracy is a government of the people, by the people and for the people,

in a democratic political system; government power is legitimized by the consent of the governed

(people).Democracy is thus a political system of governance that, through a number of democratic

institutions and procedures, secures its citizens a range of civil and political liberties and regularly allows

them to participate and compete in free and fair elections.

What is Mandate protection? “Election mandate” involves the relationship between the people’s votes and the outcomes of an election;

people’s votes and their participation in the electoral process represent their giving consent to the

candidates for whom they vote to govern on their behalf. In Nigeria, candidates who win a majority of

votes are considered to have won the people’s mandate to govern. The people’s right to choose and

reject representatives at the ballot box should be revered, and participating in an election is a fundamental

right. However, it is also citizens’ responsibility to engage in the electoral process, to stand up against

malpractice, and to ensure that the elections in their country are meaningful.

monitoring of all stages of the electoral process.

Election observer To observe elections and give unbiased reports

Who ensures that our mandate is Protected

Stakeholders and their Responsibilities

Government

Should create a level playing ground for all political parties and persons.

Creating a truly independent multi stakeholder INEC.

Provide adequate funding for INEC

INEC/SIEC

Organizing, undertaking, and supervising all elections;

Prepare, maintain and update the registration of voters;

Monitor campaigns of all political parties including their finances;

Conduct voter’s/ civic education;

Counting, recording and announcing results;

Prosecuting violations of the Electoral Act.

Law enforcement/Security

They are to protect the election process by keeping peace during and after Election Day

Citizens

Seek to know and understand party manifestoes

Articulate community needs and engage political office seekers on their planned programme

Register to vote and participate in the voting exercise. Observe the count and ensure that votes are not stolen

pg. 125

APPENDIX D

CIVIC AND VOTER EDUCATION MATERIAL PRODUCED BY DPAI & LACSOP