A Study Of Election Violence In Nigeria, 1983-2011

A Study Of Election Violence In Nigeria, 1983-2011

Chapter One

The 1983 Election The Ondo Debacle

Preface 1

The Ondo Debacle Politics and Election in Ondo State5

ENDNOTES12

Chapter Two

The June 12 Election The Military And The Nigerian Society

Background to June 12 Election of 199314

The Emergence of ChiefM.K.O Abiola and Alhaji Bashir Tofa17

Election, Election Result and dissolution of June 12 1993 Election21

Post-Election Violence 28

ENDNOTES39

CHAPTER THREE

The 2011 Election Prejudice Masquerading As Electoral Project

Preface 41

Previewing the 2011 Election44

– Election Violence47

– Election Violence49 ENDNOTE 63

Chapter Four

Conclusion68

Bibliography72

Chapter One

THE 1983 ELECTION THE ONDO DEBACLE

Preface

The electoral process in Nigerian has been characterized by violence. still, recent instantiations of electoral violence have assumed an unknown magnitude and changing form and character, with negative counteraccusations for popular stability and connection. exemplifications include disputed and violent choices in Nigeria where the attendant hunt for requital through functionary and unofficial responses has, altogether, been largely trapped in heightening contradictions 1

As a conception, electoral violence principally has to do with all forms of organized acts or pitfalls, physical, cerebral and structural aimed at bogarting, harming, blackmailing a political stakeholder before, during and after an election with a view to determining, delaying, or else impacting an electoral process.2 The import of this is that electoral violence is multidimensional, having physical, cerebral and structural confines. The physical rudiments include assassination of political opponents, wildfire, sacking, firing, hijacking and hostage taking, forceful dislocation of crusade rallies, fortified raids on voting and collating centres, including swiping of ballot papers and boxes at gun point. The cerebral dimension relates to functionary and unofficial conduct that produce fear in the people, which may be a product of physical violence. These include pitfalls to opposition forces by security agents or through phone calls or textbook dispatches. This structural dimension of electoral violence seems much more pronounced, being a product of structural imbalance, including compulsion of citizens by government to register or bounce, unstable openings for political parties and campaigners, abuse of power of obligation, falsification of election result, as well as the politicization of security and electoral officers 3

It’s also apparent that electoral violence, like an election itself, isn’t confined to Election day alone. It can be ahead, during and after the choices. Pre-election violence any include acts pitfalls against electoral stakeholders during namer’s enrollment or electioneering juggernauts. Election day violence includes the swiping of ballot papers or boxes, assaults on opposition parties or agents, and importunity or intimidation by security agents. In the fate of an election, electoral violence may take the form of violent demurrers against electoral apparel, whether real or imagined, and of the state’s planting its outfit of force in response to the kick, thereby further fuelling the violence. In addition, electoral violence is a form, maybe the most deadly form of electoral fraud which has been defined as “ covert sweats to shape election results.4 This can be executed both by the peremptory power holder to avoid defeat and by power opposition rudiments seeking to wrest political power form the governing party. In utmost cases, electoral information similar as enrollment data, vote results, ballots; crusade accoutrements , for illustration, vehicles and public address systems, electoral installations similar as polling and counting stations, and electoral events including juggernauts ralies.

Eventually given the fact that electoral violence can be employed by both the ruling and opposition forces, coupled with the wide array of its likely targets as enunciated over, electoral violence no doubt constitutes a major source of popular insecurity. Indeed, it can pose itself as a abecedarian trouble to the prospects of popular connection

The Ondo Debacle Politics and Election in Ondo State

Ondo state presumably appertained to as the “ Sunshine state ” was created from defunct western state on 3rd February, 1976. It covers a land area of 14, 739 square kilometers with its executive capital at Akure. The state is bounded in the north by Ekiti state and Kogi state, in the east by Edo state, in the west by Osun and Ogunstates and in the south by the Altantic Ocean. Ondo state is people predominated by Yoruba who speak colorful shoptalk of Yoruba language. The state has three senatorial quarter, nine Federal Houses of representative seat, twenty six state House of Assembly seat, Eighteen original Government Area. The three senatorial quarter are Ondo North made up of Akoko North- West, Akoko North- East, Akoko South- East, Akoko South- West, Awola original government Area; Ondo Central which correspond of Akure south, Akure North, Ifedore/ Igaraoke, Ondo West, Ondo East; and Ondo South which correspond of Odigbo, Irele, Ilaje, EseOdo, Okitipupa, Ileoluji/ Okeigbo Original Governments. The distribution according to senatorial quarter is grounded on the geographical sequestration within Ondo state.

Historically, it has been seen that Ondo politics and election has always been characterized by series of violence which redounded into physical combat among political western region, what’s moment appertained to as Ondo State could be said to have a deep political history that dates back to theanti-colonial struggle under the influence of the Action Group. In other words, the testament of political parties in Ondo State takes their own picture and manifestoes from the Action Group testament and fiat. It is, thus, hardly surprising to note that their politics of moment since independence has manifested progressive tendency associated with Action Group. Action Group as a political party set the pace for popular political structure in Ondo and other south west state in Nigeria.5

The Ondo debacle was one of the major conflicts that characterize the election in Ondo state. During the alternate democracy 1979- 1985, by which time the state has been created, the Unity Party of Nigeria(U.P.N), Action Group successor in south west, continue to dominate the politics of the state. During this period, the late principal Mike Adekunle Ajasin Unity Party of Nigeria(U.P.N) won the government election of 1979, still by the alternate election of 1983, Akinwole Michael Omoboriowo, Ajasin deputy from 1979- 1983 decamped to National Party of Nigeria(N.P.N), the ruling party at the centre to dispute the guardianship race with Ajasin. As it turned out Akinwole Michael was officially the winner of the guardianship election by the Federal Electoral Commissions( FEDECO). The Declaration sprang out unprecedentedlevel ofpost-election violence across the state popularly relate to as operation Wet e during which numerous lives were lost, parcels worth several billion of naira were destroyed. The state was in a house of war during this period.

still, it could be said that the violent resistance started when the plans to carriage the election was revealed. Ondo citizens came involved in the plan to repel any attempt, to carriage the 1983 election in favour of the rival National Party of Nigerian(N.P.N), amongst whom were the immediate once governor of Ondo state, Olusegun Agagu, former Education Minister,Prof. Tunde Adeniran and former Minister for Mines and Power, Olu Agunloye, stager intelligencer and special Adjunct on Special Duties to Ajasinin 1983, Joe Aladesoun. According to resource material, it’s claimed that Joe Aladesoun told Saturday sun that the Ajasin group learnt of the plan to carriage the election one time before the election. Accordingly, he said, Ajasin assigned party leaders to discoveries result to whatever plans the rival party might have to carriage the election. Aladesoun revealed that three strategic panels were set up, finance commission which was headed by the present Afenifere leader, Reuben Fasoranti, metaphysical commission and the politic commission.

He explained that the politic commission, which he headed, was responsible for sensitizing and marshaling the people. Aladesoun tête-à-tête prepared the commentary that was read on the state radio every day. He, still, emphasized the fact that he didn’t rally the people to violence but admitted that he called on the people to defend their vote6.

In addition, the metaphysical commission was necessary towards the Ondo debacle of 1983. According to a resource material, the commission prepared fire in an egg and it was the egg that was used to burn down FEDECO office that was girdled by solders. When the dogface saw egg in the hand of a woman, they didn’t anticipate that it could be dangerous. It was the egg thrown at the wall that burnt down the FEDECO office. It was claimed that there were no loss of lives. It was also claimed that the metaphysical commission member followed the dogfaces that were brought into the state wherever they went, the commission members will drop certain objects on the road and their cloth would be gummed to their body. The commission used metaphysical powers to cover the interest of the Unity Party of Nigeria(U.P.N) Ondo body.

Eventually, to assertion the true winner of the 1983 government election in Ondo state, the issue was taken to court. It was the court that reversed the result blazoned by FEDECO. The five judges that sat in Akure gave one verdict in favour of principal Ajasin. At the court of appeal that sat in Benin, four of five judges pronounced principal Ajasin winner. therefore Ajasin of the Unity Party of Nigeria(U.P.N) reclaimed its accreditation, Omoboriowo flee the state.7

ENDNOTES

Paul Adebayo andJ. Shola Omotola, “ Public Perception of the 2007 Nigeria’s General choices ”, Journal of African choices, 6( 2), 2007,p. 2001.

Isaac Albert, “Re-conceptualizing Electoral Violence ”, in Perspective on the 2003 choices in Nigeria, ed.I.O.D Albert andV. Adetula,( Abuja IDASA and Sterling Holding Publishers, 2003)p. 133.

Nwolise, “ Electoral Violence and Nigeria’s 2007 choices ”, Journal of African choices, 6( 2), 2007p. 155.

Fabrice Lehoucq, “ Electoral Fraud Causes, Types and Consequences ”, Annual Review of Political Science, 6,p. 223.

Emmanuel Ejeba, Electoral Reforms in Nigeria,( Nigeria Hubpages Publishers, Osun, 2012)p. 1.

Ibid,p. 22.

Human Rights Watch NigeriaPost-Election Violence killed 800, 2011 http//www.hrw.org/news, 2011,p. 11, penetrated on April 9, 2013.