Isaac Anumihe, Abuja

 Timothy Golu, represents Pankshin/Kanke/Kanam Constituency, Plateau State, in the House of Representatives.  A vibrant and intelligent lawmaker, Golu is also the Chairman, House Committee on Legislative Budget and Research. As an ardent lobbyist, he has used his position to attract a lot of Federal Government’s projects to his constituency. In this interview, he examines the 2019 elections, its downsides, the upsides and gave his verdict.

Let’s do a review of the 2019 elections. What were the things you observed?

 The quality of the 2019 elections, I will say, is far below the quality obtained in 2015. Remember the 2015 elections came with a history of opposition party displacing an incumbent government at the centre and in most of the states of the federation on account of the integrity of the elections.

You could see that there was not much noise about it because the issues were very clear. People decided to vote for the opposition based on their reasons. So, in a democracy, the majority decision matters. In 2019 elections, it was not a vote by the majority. There are areas elections did not take place and winners emerged. And so, you could see an integrity departure, a credibility departure. The leadership of INEC and then the APC had given signals to the fact that there was not going to be a credible election for a number of reasons.

Number one, by refusing assent to the amendment of the Electoral Act which states that Card Readers which are the major instruments in the elections (that is the casting of votes) and which could determine most of the decisions of that day, a wrong signal was sent.  The president refused and the APC supported him and he did not. Yet, we used the card readers and we used them as an administrative decision, as a guideline adopted by INEC. They were not part of the laws. The judiciary has clearly said it that when something is not recognised by law it cannot be used as evidence.  But since INEC has the authority and the credibility to adopt guidelines which are also recognised by law, then, anything that they do, whether it is guideline, becomes law. If INEC can fix a date of the election which is just a guideline, can fix the month of the election, the time for election from 8am  to 2pm, the usage of voter register, the use of Permanent Voters Cards (PVCs);  all these things are guidelines. If they can use these and then it becomes part of the electoral process, then what is the difference between guideline and the law? The guidelines should form part of the law because they are all together. Anything that INEC does have a root in   the constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria and the electoral act. So, the judiciary should help us interpret this so that there should be no confusion. The judiciary can go straight to say that a biro used by INEC should have integrity within the election. The INEC itself is a product of the law. All the people in INEC were appointed through due process by the person who is supposed to appoint them. They are qualified by law and they are there by law. So, every action that they take has been given legal support by the constitution. So, I don’t think it is anything strange to say that the card reader should not count. But you see the APC and the president feel since the court said that the law does not recognise the card reader, they want to capitalise on that.  It has already become a pronouncement. Instead of the election to be cancelled you now have to rely on the law that failed to recognise the card reader. Look at what INEC has done to contradict itself?  What is difficult in recognising the card reader?

To this end, I want to say that the 2019 elections are very far from the quality of previous elections. I now feel that the INEC chairman did not do well. He cannot defend most of his actions. That is why most of the RECs cannot pick your telephone calls. Like in my own case the REC cannot come out to openly to talk about what happened in my own case because he knows what they did and he knows that he has no explanation so the best thing is to keep a blind eye and then keep silent on it completely.

 What is your take on the various inconclusive elections that we had?

 Where does inconclusive election emanate from? It is not in the law because they (INEC) have the powers to cancel elections based on certain issues, security and otherwise. Inconclusive election is not part of the law. It is just a manipulative tendency or an instrument to manipulate. Inconclusiveness of elections is just to give them time to think on how to plan the next action. That is the meaning of inconclusiveness by the APC or by INEC because it is in conjunction with APC that they did it. Since they declared it inconclusive, within the same 12 hours, they declared a winner. In my case they declared the elections inconclusive around 12 midnight, around 2pm the following day; they had declared somebody a winner.

 You mean there was no re-run in your case before the winner emerged?

Related News

 There was no rerun and there was no any decision by stakeholders to set aside that. Once you declare something inconclusive, then you come and sit down with stakeholders. Was it the election that was inconclusive or was it the collation?  In my own case they said that it was the election and the collation. So, we have not come back to take a decision. But the next day they announced the results of the election. Which election? They said that they have concluded the elections. Where? When? What makes it inconclusive? Why is it conclusive? How is it conclusive? No explanation. Nothing. They did not even make a formal presentation. No formal announcement as it is obtained elsewhere because if you are making a credible announcement of election that is coming out of a credible election, you will not hide anywhere to announce it. I have contested elections twice and I have won twice and they have been announced openly twice. Even the losers there congratulated me. Anything you are doing and you don’t want the media to know, that is the number one sign that that thing is fraudulent.

 If there is no integrity in terms of electing a legislator, where is the   integrity of the laws and representations that the person will provide? If there is no integrity in an election there will be no integrity in representation. Whatever the person does there is useless because the people will see it.

 What steps are you taking to seek redress?

We have filed a petition before the tribunal and we believe that the tribunal is going to do justice to it. It should look at the issues critically and they will grant us justice because the judiciary is the last hope of democracy. If the judiciary does not do so then people will make a mockery of democracy, and the next elections may be worse than this. Democracy as it is now is only in the hands of the judiciary. Only the judiciary can save us so that democracy can be consolidated.

What advice do you have for INEC for future elections?

 INEC must do something to build on its own integrity. It is not just collecting money from politicians and doing their own bidding. They are not helping democracy. People see the job of being appointed INEC officials as a way of making money.  They don’t see it as an opportunity to provide service to the people. They see INEC job as a way of making money and they are not helping democracy. Most of these people are not helping democracy.  INEC can be independent depending on the person. In 2015 elections, Jega asserted himself and sustained the independence of INEC. The current chairman did not. Even if you ask him a question, he would answer it in the way that APC would answer it.

 How do you think the independence of INEC can be restored?

INEC decided to tilt in the direction of the executive because they have the money and they are in charge of the instruments of violence and the rest of them. INEC will not get any favour from the National Assembly. INEC being domiciled with the executive is not the problem but those who work there at particular periods are the problem. Somebody may come in as INEC chairman and may come with a different agenda to make money and go away, while others may have come to serve. So, it depends on what you have come to do.

You have been in the House for eight years now, tell us, what is it like?

By the Grace of God I have done a lot. I don’t want to be the one to blow my trumpet but if I should say it, I have done my best. I have attracted more projects ever in the history of my own constituency. Everybody that has represented the area has done his or her best but the projects that I have brought in are unprecedented. Is it the road projects, is it the water projects, is it skill acquisition, is it school, is it employment opportunities, is it bills and motions, I have done all that. I have represented my people well. I have not disappointed my people. If you ask my people now they will tell you that they are proud of me. They are happy with my achievements. That is why many people are not happy over what has happened because power comes from God and God has given me but armed robbers waited on the road to snatch the victory. The Bible says that ‘the thief come to steal, kill and to destroy.’ So, they came to steal it. I believe that God will not allow that. I have brought a turning point in the lives of my community. We never had Federal projects before. I have brought them. We never had a minister from my constituency. We have never had a permanent secretary. But I used my position to better the lot of my people.