Last Sunday I arrived in Seoul to the most unusual welcome. The plane docked, the doors opened and an official of the Korean government came on board and asked everyone to return to their seats. Once settled, he reeled out the names of all ten Nigerians on board the flight and asked us to follow him. We were not traveling together, so this must have been a coordinated process of sifting, between the airline and the government. The official led us to a screening desk where thermometers were inserted in each of our ears. A rather unhygienic process as the official would undo the disposable cap once both ears of each passenger was checked and then screw on another cap for the next passenger. For once, I realised how effective and hygienic the processes at Nigerian airports were and could only hope that Korean officials had not transferred germs from their masked fingers to my ears. Following this check, the health screening forms, which had been distributed while on board, were collected along with our passports and temperatures recorded on them. If I thought this was the end, I was to be shocked over the next hour. 

Voting has come a long way in Nigeria, especially in the 15 years of our democracy. The number of voters has increased and the voting process has improved. In 1999, almost 58 million people registered to vote, with a 53% turn-out at the polls. The 2011 elections saw an increase in the number of registered voters to 73 million with a 54% turn-out and was considered relatively free and fair by observers. This was in stark contrast to both the 2003 and 2007 elections, which were said to have been plagued by a systematic manipulation of results. Towards the 2015 elections, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has so far registered an estimated 70 million voters and counting. Commendably, it has deployed a biometric data system to reduce electoral fraud, and has already released a timetable for the 2015 general elections. However, past experiences becloud these achievements and many remain sceptical about the resolve of INEC to deliver a hitch-free and credible set of elections in 2015. INEC has been marred with allegations of corruption and partiality in its conduct of past elections. Its 2012 – 2016 strategic plan identifies some of the commission’s challenges to include late preparation for elections, poor record management, inadequate communication between its headquarters and state offices and poor quality of adhoc staff amongst others. In the context of the improvements already made, challenges identified and closeness to the general elections, I posit that there may be a few things that we can learn from various places to further improve the election’s process. I do not advocate copying and pasting solutions, but encourage us to learn from those that have implemented solutions that work. After all, according to a Nigerian proverb “he who cannot learn from the experiences of his neighbour should be pitied.” Learning from India From April to May 2014, India conducted the largest general election in the world. 815 million people registered to vote and 66% turned up at the polls. The process was considered free and fair with almost no post electoral violence recorded. The Electoral Commission of India adopted a Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT), an automatically generated receipt given to each voter after casting a vote to show who and what party was voted. This process reduced ambiguity over the candidate and party voted for by each individual. In essence, India leveraged technology to increase the credibility of voting during the country’s general elections. Likewise, INEC can look to adapting technology to improve the voting experience and reduce electoral fraud. Learning from Brazil In October 2014, Brazil conducted its general elections with eleven candidates challenging the incumbent President Dilma Rousseff. Of the 142 million possible voters, 81% turned out to cast their votes and the results were released within 48 hours. Electoral laws in Brazil indicate that a candidate must obtain over 50% of the valid votes in order to win. The incumbent president obtained only 41.6% of the

gate.io login

Of the many promises President Buhari has made to Nigerians, one that appears to be prioritised is his fight against corruption. Earlier this year, while receiving the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Ms Christine Lagarde, the president promised to stop financial leakages by looking inward, enforcing regulation and adopting best practices to mitigate the effect of dwindling oil price on the Nigerian economy. However, very little can be said of this promise to stop financial leakages as not much is evident in this regard. It appears that many Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) of the Government have carried on their businesses as usual, constrained by the Treasury Single Account but determined to find and exploit other loopholes. One therefore wonders whether this fight against corruption at the expense of a robust development agenda is not a misnomer given that financial leakages persist and might even be expanding.

Minimum wage is not an indicator of fair wage in many countries, including Nigeria. Recent efforts towards increasing the minimum wage would achieve more impact if channelled towards legislating compliance with this wage floor and implementing a safety-net strategy for casual workers. These could have significant impact on poverty levels and consequently promote socio-economic development. A minimum wage legislates how much the lowest skilled workers should be paid and is intended to address income inequality, but one may safely argue that in Nigeria, it has not yet successfully achieved these objectives. 

The current economic recession is forcing Nigerians to think through potential solutions. For once, people are going beyond praying and wishing for better times, to actively seeking the way forward. Many are convinced that the economy has spiralled out of the control of the Government and urgent intervention of some sort is required. All categories of business are being impacted and companies have been forced to contract or re-align their strategy and operations to ride the tide. Despite the times, a few companies are experiencing growth evidenced by their financials, so we might ask how such organizations are able to thrive during these difficult times, in a bid for others to learn.