Inducement of voters with cash is as old as elections in Nigeria, but it seems to have taken the centre stage and has consequently become the major determinant of electoral contests, thereby gradually eroding the peoples’ confidence in the electoral process, FELIX NWANERI writes
From electoral violence to ballot snatching and stuffing, the drift at the moment in Nigeria’s electioneering is vote-buying, which involves inducement of the electorate with cash by agents of political parties and their respective candidates in return for votes.
This ugly trend is despite the fact that the nation has strengthened its electoral laws and invested in biometric technology, and there is no doubt that it is has not only become a norm, but fast eroding the peoples’ confidence in the electoral process.
Though money had always played a major role in Nigeria’s elections, it has become clear that it is now the major determinant of electoral contests given the outcomes of recent elections in the country.
The most recent is the by-elections for unoccupied seats in the Senate, House of Representatives and state Houses of Assembly across 12 states on August 16. There were reports of massive vote buying across the various states, where the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) conducted the by-elections and the major culprits were the leading political parties.
Agents of these parties were said to have openly induced voters with money ranging from N5,000 to N20,000 per vote. Interestingly, inducement of the voters was done in the open even as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the police arrested some of the suspected vote-buyers with bags of cash, a development that was confirmed by the various groups that monitored the elections.
In Anambra State, for instance, where by-elections were held to the fill Anambra South Senatorial District and Onitsha North 1 State Constituency vacant seat, it was allegations of vote buying against the contending parties – All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) and All Progressives Congress (APC). Reports had it that both parties offered voters between N10,000 and N25,000 per vote and some of the voters, who spoke on the development said:
“They came here and gave everybody money ranging from N10, 000 to N25,000. There is hunger in the land, some of us rejected their offers, but others didn’t.” It was same story in Adamawa State, where a byelection was held for the Ganye State Constituency seat as the APC and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) accused each other of vote buying.
They invest in bribing of voters today only to plunder schools, hospitals, roads and jobs tomorrow. They are not leaders; they are licensed looters
Chairman of Ganye Local Government Area, Farouk Mohammed, who spoke with journalists after casting his vote, said: “APC chieftains are busy buying votes because their government has failed woefully, so they don’t have what to tell Nigerians.”
Adamawa APC Organising Secretary, Mustapha Ribadu, who reacted to Mohammed’s claim, however put the blame on the PDP. “The PDP is the one inducing voters with cash in this election,” he said.
The scenario was not different in Kaduna State, where the PDP rejected results of the by-elections in Basawa, Zaria Kewaye and Chikun/Kajuru state and federal constituencies over alleged vote buying and intimidati. In a statement signed by its state chairman, the PDP alleged that the APCled government in the state deployed what it described as “gestapo and commando tactics” to frustrate its chances at the polls.
The statement read in part: “The abduction of our candidate and members of our campaign committee for the Chikun/ Kajuru Federal Constituency, seizure of funds meant for logistics and agents’ allowances, and massive vote buying were carried out in full public glare. This showcases the APC’s shameless disregard for democracy. “We are afraid that if this undemocratic trend continues, the problem of voter apathy will only worsen and peak dangerously by 2027.”
Recall that security operatives in Kaduna State arrested Shehu Patangi, a suspected political agent, with over ₦25 million allegedly meant for vote buying during the Chikun/Kajuru Federal Constituency by-election. Police spokesperson in the state, Mansir Hassan, said Patangi was caught early on election day at a hotel on Turunku road, Kaduna, where he was allegedly coordinating the distribution of funds to sway voters. A total of ₦25.96 million was recovered from him.
A familiar path
Before now voters were asked to flag or take pictures of thumb-printed ballot papers as proof of voting a specified political in what was termed “see and buy,” but the trend has changed to inducement with cash ahead of election or on election day.
And despite INEC tightening the noose on vote buyers and sellers as well, perpetrators of this act which gained prominence during the September 2016 governorship election in Edo State has become more brazen.
While chieftains of both parties openly distributed money at the various polling units ranging from N3,000 to N4,000 per vote in what was dubbed “cash for votes” then, the slogan changed to ‘vote and cook soup’ in the November 2017 governorship election in Ondo State. Most polling units were said to have gotten up to N450,000, with each voter getting between N3,000 and N5,000 during the election.
The bar got raised during the November 2017, governorship election in Anambra State. This was attested to by election observer groups, which in their assessment condemned the widespread vote buying by agents of the various candidates that contested the poll. Mr. Clement Nwankwo, the Convener of Nigeria Civil Society Situation Room (NCSSR), for instance, portrayed the election as one of the worst electoral bazaars since Nigeria’s return to democratic rule in 1999.
The bazaar continued with the Ekiti governorship election in July 2018. As usual, the two major parties – APC and PDP – traded blames but it was glaring that both were the major culprits among the 35 parties that contested the election.
It was, however, a new dimension during the September 2018 governorship election in Osun State as some of the candidates compelled party leaders to swear an oath that they would spend the money given them to induce voters and not pocket it. On election day, voters got as much as N10,000 for a vote. As usual, the main parties, APC and the PDP traded blames over allegations of vote buying.
The PDP, which was in opposition in the state at the time, particularly accused the then ruling APC of buying votes with billions of naira. While the PDP claimed that the 67 local government areas and council development areas in the state were made to cough up N12.5 million each for the purpose, the APC, on its part, said the opposition party started inducing voters ahead of the election.
All-time high in 2023
While vote buying is not limited to the off-cycle governorship elections but also prevalent during general elections, it hit an all time high during the 2023 general election as the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), in a report titled “Corruption in Nigeria: Patterns and trends third survey on corruption as experienced by the population,” said the elections recorded 22 per cent of vote buying, which is five per cent higher than the 2019 general election with 17 per cent.
The agency disclosed in the report released on July 11, 2024 that 22 per cent of Nigerian citizens reported that they were personally offered money in exchange of a vote before or during the 2023 general election, while nine per cent were offered another favour.
The report stated: “This represents an increase in both types of vote buying compared with 2019, when personal offers of money were reported by 17 per cent and personal offers of other favours were reported by four per cent of citizens.
“Furthermore, in 2023, 10 per cent reported that they were not personally offered money or another favour in exchange for their vote, but that instead another member of their household was approached, compared to five per cent in 2019.” However, NBS said its survey revealed that some of the voters were not influenced by their voting decisions even after collecting money or favour.
It said: “Just over half (55 per cent) of the citizens who were personally offered money or another favour in exchange for their vote in the 2023 general election reported that the offer did not influence their vote choice, while 40 per cent of those citizens said they voted for the person or political party which offered them money or a favour precisely because of the offer.
“Between 2019 and 2023, the proportion of Nigerians who were personally offered bribes in exchange for votes increased similarly across sexes, urban and rural areas, and age groups.”
Breaking down the prevalence of the vote buying zones, NBS stated that there were minimal to no changes in South-West, South-South and North Central parts of the country between 2019 and 2023. The North-West, however, increased from 23 per cent in 2019 to 44 per cent in 2023. The North-West, on its part, recorded “a relatively high share of 55 per cent of citizens who were offered money or another favour in exchange for their votes.”
Party primaries not left out
Vote buying is also evident during the candidates’ nomination process by political parties as delegates, who decide the respective flag bearers of the respective parties usually go for the highest bidder among the aspirants.
The delegates, who become the most sought-after brides during the primary elections always see it as their “kill period.” This explains why they demand for all sorts of gratification from aspirants in return for votes.
What happened at the 2023 presidential primary elections of the APC and PDP comes handy in this regard. Analysts captured what transpired at the shadow polls of the two leading parties as “dollar rain.” Presidential aspirants of the PDP were said to have paid between $10,000 and $20,000 per vote.
Possibly, it was the “dollar rain” report that attracted officials of the EFCC to the Velodrome of the MKO Abiola Stadium, Abuja, venue of the presidential primary won by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar. Although there was no report of any arrest, one of PDP presidential aspirants, Mazi Sam Ohuabunwa, who confirmed inducement, said the delegates could not resist the $10,000, $15,000 and $20,000 offered to them by the ‘’four leading contestants.”
In a “thank you message” to his supporters after the PDP presidential primary, Obuabunwa, particularly noted that the effect of money was overwhelming in the choice made by the delegates. The message read in part: “It is clear that the effect of money was overwhelming in the choice made by the delegates.
It was also clear that the delegates could not resist the lure of $20,000, $15,000 and $10,000 dollars offered by the four leading contestants. We were aware that money would be a factor, but we had hoped it would not be the exclusive factor. “In the current dispensation, a few members of a party are involved in the determination of the fate of the aspirants.
They now deal in and distribute major international currencies, especially the dollar.” Mohammed Hayatu-Deen, one of the PDP presidential aspirants, who pulled out of the race at the eve of the party’s special national convention, also cited monetization of the process as reason why he bowed out.
“I joined the contest as a democrat, with an open mind to keenly contest and accept the result of a process that is fair, credible and transparent. It is therefore based on personal principles and with great humility that have decided after wide consultations to withdraw from this contest which has been obscenely monetized,” he said.
There were also claims of inducement of delegates at the APC special national convention that held between June 8 and 9, 2022 at the Eagle Square Abuja, and which the emergence of the then national leader of the party, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu (now president) as the party’s candidate.
While leaders of the two leading parties denied monetization of their nomination processes, many Nigerians had no option than to believe the claim of “dollar rain” when a video of a PDP delegate from Kaduna State, who donated part of the proceeds he received from aspirants to his constituents surfaced online.
The delegate, Tanko Sabo, said in the video that he donated over N12 million he got from the party’s presidential primary to the less-privileged in the Sanga Local Government Area of Kaduna State.
Effective prosecution of electoral offenders will be the first step towards stamping out vote buying, undue influence, intimidation, snatching of ballot boxes s and all other forms of electoral offences in the country
He added that he was not afraid that the EFCC might come after him and that he had no fears or apologies for living up to the promise he made to his constituents, when he was seeking to be elected as a national delegate.
Sabo was emphatic that he and other party delegates were relentlessly courted by aspirants, with some of them offering them hotel accommodations at excessive rates.
His words: “Immediately I got to Abuja, some of the aspirants started calling me and some of them gave me N400,000 or N500,000 to go and lodge in any hotel of my choice. But I slept in my car instead of looking for a luxurious place to sleep.
“I prefer to eat noodles and pepper soup than to dine at the Hilton for more than N20,000 per plate. I am not afraid of the EFCC because I spent the money I collected on my people. Will EFCC tell me I didn’t do well by paying school fees for orphans and hospital bills for elderly people who have no means of livelihood? I satisfied my conscience and all my people are happy.”
What the law says
While vote buying is subject to punishment, the attainment of compliance to this legal provision remains a challenge. Sections 124 and 130 of the Electoral Act (as amended) clearly criminalise the act of vote buying as bribery and conspiracy.
Section 130, particularly states: “A person who (a) corruptly by himself or by any other person at any time after the date of an election has been announced, directly or indirectly gives or provides or pays money to or for any person for the purpose of corruptly influencing that person or any other person to vote or refrain from voting at such election, or on account of such person or any other person having voted or refrained from voting at such election; or (b) being a voter, corruptly accepts or takes money or any other inducement during any of the period stated in paragraph (a) of this section, commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine of N100,000 or 12 months imprisonment or both.”
However, like other electoral offenders, the relevant agencies appear to be handicapped, when it comes to prosecution of persons involved in inducement of voters. While this could be blamed on lack of capacity given the large number of people involved, INEC under the leadership of Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, has continued to warn on the threat vote buying portends to the nation’s electoral process.
Dangers ahead of 2027
Some stakeholder, who spoke on the prevalent vote buying trend, warned that it constitutes a threat to free, fair and credible elections in Nigeria, particularly as the nation inches close to the 2027 general election.
Labour Party’s presidential candidate in 2023, Peter Obi, who lamented the impact of vote buying on the nation’s electoral process, while reacting to the outcome of the August 16 by-elections, warned that the culture of selling and buying of votes is already destroying Nigeria from within.
Likening the trend to a “slow poison” that kills both democracy and development unknowingly, Obi said those who bought votes are not being generous, but merely purchasing the licence to loot public funds. His words: “They invest in bribing of voters today only to plunder schools, hospitals, roads and jobs tomorrow. They are not leaders; they are licensed looters.”
Obi further stressed that those who sold their votes were not victims alone; they were also accomplices. “Every time you trade your ballot for money, you mortgage your children’s future for crumbs. You sell away the hospital bed that may save your life, the classrooms that should educate your children, and the jobs that should lift your family out of poverty. “If your vote was worthless, no one would pay for it.
The real power is not in their money, it is in your conscience, your courage, and your choice,” he said. He called on Nigerians to resist the politics of bribery and rise above temporary gains, warning that the nation faced a stark choice of either to remain trapped in poverty through vote-selling, or break free by electing leaders who built rather than loot.
“A new Nigeria is possible but it will only be born the day we stop auctioning our future for cash,” he averred. A former Secretary General of Conference of Nigerian Political Parties (CNPP), Willy Ezugwu, who also spoke on the issue, told New Telegraph that while vote buying is not entirely new in the polity, it portends great danger to the electoral process. His words: “It is worrisome that we have graduated from ballot snatching and writing of fictitious results to vote buying.
This means that only those who looted our treasury will continue to win elections. I call on the electoral umpire to make a bold statement ahead of the 2027 general election by bringing to justice all electoral offenders in the just concluded by-elections. “Effective prosecution of electoral offenders will be the first step towards stamping out vote buying, undue influence, intimidation, snatching of ballot boxes s and all other forms of electoral offences in the country.
“The powers of INEC on trial of offences under the Electoral Act, 2022 is provided for by Section 45 of the Act, which states that ‘(1) An offence committed under this Act shall be triable in a Magistrate Court or a High Court of a State in which the offence is committed, or the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. (2) A prosecution under this Act shall be undertaken by legal officers of the Commission or any legal practitioner appointed by it,” he said.
No doubt, Nigeria has made significant gains in enhancing the legal framework to guide against vote buying through the Electoral Act, however, there is need to address some of the notable inconsistencies, which drive up cost of elections for parties and candidates as well as prevent credible candidates from running for political offices.
