Who Got What, How and Why: An Analysis of the April 9 ...and Robinson in Ekeh, 1989, 123). Every election is held within two contexts, the political and social relationships in the

Biereenu-Nnabugwu, M; Alumona, I. M.; & Umeifekwem, U. (2012), Who Got What, How and Why: An Analysis of the April 9, 2011 Senatorial Election in Anambra State (Nigeria), ANSU Journal of Arts and Social Sciences, 1 (1):21-35

21

Who Got What, How and Why: An Analysis of the April 9, 2011 Senatorial Election in Anambra State (Nigeria)

BIEREENU-NNABUGWU, MAKODI, PhD Department of Political Science, Nnamdi Azikiwe State University, Awka [email protected] ALUMONA, IKENNA MIKE Department of Political Science, Anambra State University, Igbariam Campus [email protected] UMEIFEKWEM, UCHENNA Department of Public Administration, Anambra State University, Igbariam Campus [email protected]

Abstract Using a combination of descriptive survey design and secondary data, this study examines the April 09, 2011 Senatorial Election in Anambra state, Nigeria. The study details the underlying contextual factors behind the interplay of power and interest during the election and the forces behind the emergence of successful candidates in the election. The central argument is that despite the rhetoric of the campaigns by the political parties, the weeping up of religious and community interest by the candidates, and the ills observed in the conduct of the election, the electorate was guided mainly by the personality and the past record of the candidate’s in their selection during the

election. Against the ills observed in the emergence of candidates at the party level which negatively affected the electoral process, the paper finally recommends genuine reformation of the internal organization of political parties as this holds the key to democratic consolidation in Nigeria. Key words: Election, power, democratic consolidation, internal party democracy and interest.

mailto:[email protected]

ANSU Journal of Arts and Social Sciences

22

Introduction

No human observer can ever grasp the whole life of a political system in action, but more can be learnt in a space of about three months during an election than in any other comparable period (Mackenzie and Robinson in Ekeh, 1989, 123). Every election is held within two contexts, the political and social relationships in the particular area involved and the legal and administrative framework which regulates the conduct of the elections (Post, 1963, P.157). An election result is the product of many factors – long term and short term, political and non-political (Butler and Rose, 1960, P.196).

The above remarks aptly bring to

fore the importance of the context in which an election takes place. The contextual factors surrounding an election whether they are political, economic, social, or institutional invariably determine the outcome of the election. It is the contextual factors and issues surrounding an election that make it interesting and exciting. As we have observed elsewhere, the period of election is the most exciting one in any political system because of the numerous interesting activities that take place within the period. Such activities include political meetings and discussions, electioneering campaigns, rallies, life and media debates, voting etc (Alumona 2010, 279). The importance of these activities cannot be ignored because in the final

analysis they determine who gets what, how and why in every democratic setting. Elections have continued to draw considerable attention from scholars, interest groups, non-state actors like civil societies and international organizations because they represent the only constitutional process through which the citizens can struggle for the control of state power. It is for the control and exercise of state power that political parties and pressure groups are formed and different strategies employed. The notion that man is a political animal as propounded by Aristotle justifies the whole essence and constant struggle for power and control which takes place during an election. Osaghae (2005, 25) differently puts it thus “power relations

and competition for power constitutes the core of politics.”

The National Assembly elections that finally took place on April 09, 2011 after two previous fixtures and cancellations typify the struggle for power and control described above. The contestations that characterized the election starting from the pre-election period supports the assertion that election in Nigeria have been problematic and are characterized by different forms of electoral fraud (Alumona, 2010: 279). The election being the first in the series of the Nigerian 2011 general elections provided a unique opportunity for the inhabitants of Anambra State to participate in the electoral process. Against the background of Nigeria’s

troubled elections and the demands for electoral reforms, the election most importantly provided an opportunity for the newly reconstituted Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) under Professor Attahiru Jega to prove to

Biereenu-Nnabugwu, M; Alumona, I. M.; & Umeifekwem, U., (2012), Who Got What, How and Why: An Analysis of the April 9, 2011 Senatorial Election in Anambra State (Nigeria), ANSU Journal of Arts and Social Sciences, 1 (1):21-35

23

Nigerians that elections could still be used as a means of consolidating democracy. The election was unique in many respects which we intend to demonstrate later.

The basic concern of this study is to examine a part of the election namely the senatorial election in Anambra State with a view to explore and understand the factors behind the emergency of successful candidates during the election. Problem Statement, Objectives and Justifications Anambra state is one of the thirty six constituent units of the Nigerian federation. It is located at the south-eastern part of the country. The state which has a total population of four million, one hundred and eighty two thousand thirty two persons according to the results of the last controversial 2006 national population census, is divided into 21 local government areas. For the purpose of representation in the upper chamber of the National assembly (ie the Senate), the state, like all other states in the federation, has three senatorial districts namely: Anambra North, Anambra South and Anambra Central. Electoral Politics in Anambra State since Nigeria returned to democratic rule in May 29, 1999 has attracted attention for various reasons. Prominent among them is the politics of ‘godfatherism’ or

‘machine’ ‘politics’, which before now

appeared to have taken over the capacity of the electorate to choose their representatives. The event of the Senatorial election brought to fore the interplay of power, forces and interests in four significant dimensions which formed the problematic that this study intends to unravel. First, was the involvement of all

the major political gladiators in the state in the Senatorial election. This is made up of three major groups namely: most of those who contested but lost the Feb 6, 2010 gubernatorial election in the state, the incumbent senators and other well known political figures. The involvement of these gladiators which among others include: Dr Chris Andy Uba, Prince Nicholas Ukachukwu, Senator Ikechukwu Obiora, Dr.Chris Nwabueze Ngige Senator Joy Emodi and Prof. Dora Akunyili, raised the stakes in the election as it brought to test the popularity of these gladiators, their political parties and the power of incumbency advantage which has become an acceptable phenomenon in electoral contests (Gordon and Landa, 2009).

Secondly, the level of contestations among the different candidates for the tickets of the different parties was alarming. In the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the contestations for the party’s tickets were such that in some places like the Anambra North and South senatorial districts several candidates laid claims to the party’s

ticket. In the All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA), the protestations revolved around the allegation that the party’s tickets for the three senatorial districts were all given to candidates who were known not to be members of the party. In the process, the primaries of the different parties were marred with a lot of irregularities which once again brought to lime light the lack of internal democracy among the parties. The contestations among the candidates for the tickets of the parties most importantly spurred the presence of some smaller political parties in the state since candidates who lost the nomination of their parties had to join the


24

smaller parties. These parties such as the Labour Party, Accord party, e.t.c; before the elections were largely unknown in the state. The election therefore was seen as an opportunity for these parties to launch themselves into the political arena of the state. Thirdly, was the nature of the electioneering campaigns which exposed a lot of issues bordering on as religious and community interests. During the electioneering campaigns, the candidates all made serious positive and negative comments about these interests. For example, the candidates of the other parties accused the ruling party in the state – the All Progressive Grand Alliance of what they called an attempt to ‘Agulunize’1 the Senate. This is because two out of three of the party’s candidates

for the senatorial elections were all from Agulu the home town of the state Governor – Mr. Peter Obi. The role of the Governor in the emergence of these candidates did not help matters. From the religious angle, since majority of the candidates were all Roman Catholics, it was also argued in some circles that there is an attempt to annihilate the other denominations from the political scene of the state. Finally and most importantly was the management of the election by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). The conduct of the election especially in the Anambra Central Senatorial district left much to be desired. The disputations arising from the conduct of the election in Anambra Central Senatorial district which led to two different returning officers 1. Agulunize is coined from the word Agulu which is the

name of the home town of the State Governor Mr. Peter Obi.

announcing different results raised a lot of issues bordering on the legal and administrative framework within which the election took place. The controversy over the removal of Mr. Alex Anene the initial returning officer for the election after he had alleged that some top members of the All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA) were trying to induce him to announce a mutilated result, and his replacement with Prof. Charles Esimone, who declared the election inconclusive, affected the confidence of the electorate in the capacity of INEC to conduct a free and fair election. The further announcement by INEC declaring the election inconclusive which is as a result of the findings of a six man panel that was set up to investigate the controversy surrounding the election still did not help to restore the people’s

confidence in the capacity of INEC to organize a free and fair re-run in the effected areas which made the election inconclusive. The above was the political environment in which the election took place and winners were declared. It is also within the context of the issues raised above that this study is guided by one basic research question: what factors were behind the emergence of those who won the election? Pursuant to the above, the study is premised on the basic assumption that: despite the rhetoric of the campaigns by the political parties, the weeping up of religious and community interests, and the ills observed in the conduct of the elections by INEC, the electorate was guided mainly by the personality and record of the candidates in their choice of candidates during the election. As a result of the foregoing, the study examined the level of participation


25

in the election. This also enabled us have a proper understanding of the different political parties that struggled for power in the election. The role of the Independent National Electoral Commission as an institution of the state charged with the responsibility of providing the administrative and legal framework within which the election took place was also examined. A proper understanding of politics in Anambra state we believe is a path to discovering and interpreting the configuration of power and forces in the South-east. This is because Anambra State is taken to be the heartbeat of south eastern Nigeria. In this sense, the study is timely and significant. Theoretically, the study contributes to the ongoing discussions on elections and democratic consolidation in Nigeria. These underscore the justifications of the study. Theoretical Framework An understanding of the factors behind the emergence of those who won the election which this study intends to unravel, basically rests on the issue of voting behaviour. The emergence of those who won the election is first and foremost a product of the aggregation of the individual preferences of different voters. It is the aggregation of the individual preferences of different voters into collective decision that led to the emergence of certain candidates over others.

Voting behaviour is not a product of personal preferences. The literature on voting behaviour is littered with several factor (s) that affect voting behaviour. Different theoretical models have also been formulated to explain why people vote in a particular way. Miller (1992) has

discussed some of the models that can be useful in understanding voting behaviour in contemporary democracies. They include: 1. The sociological model: This

model argues that voters are not independent decision makers. It claims that each social group votes for the party that serves its interest. The model provides a sufficient explanation of voting behaviour in a society that is highly polarized along class, religious or ethnic lines.

2. The party identification model: This model emphasizes the importance of enduring partisan commitment. The basic claims of this model are that: (a) Substantial numbers of

voters self-consciously identify with a party and regard themselves as party supporters.

(b) their party identification is a relatively stable and enduring part of their political outlook-certainly more stable than their attitudes to particular issues and political personalities.

(c) their party identification has a significant influence upon their attitudes towards issues, personalities and government performance.

(d) their party identification also affects voting choice directly. i.e. It partially outweighs their attitudes as well as influencing them..

3. The Rational choice model - the model is interested in the link


26

between attitudes and voting choice. The basic claim of the rational choice model is that voters make up their minds about issues, performance and personalities, and then vote for the party that comes closest to delivering the polities and performance they want.

4. The dominant ideology model – this model believes that since the incumbent governments are the levers of power, they are administratively and politically more dominant than the opposition. Based on this assumption, the model argues that the incumbent government can influence the voters in three ways. It can influence political attitudes directly by addressing unemployment and other problems affecting society. Second, it can act to influence the media and then indirectly influence political attitudes. Third, it can use its power to change society – for example, by privatizing industries, houses, or by curbing trade union power and membership – through the above means, the incumbent can change even the social context within which the election takes place.

5. The election context model – this model argues that there always is an electoral context – whatever the content of that context – and that the electoral context has a significant influence on the way voters translate their preferences into votes. In specific terms the model believes that voters clearly do not regard elections as equally important and the turn-out rates

reflect that while some voters are likely to vote in congressional election, others might vote in presidential election. In some cases, more voters are likely to vote in an by-election knowing that the contest has become fierce.

Finally, it is equally necessary to point out that no particular model is perfect; the real question according to Miler (1992,434) is not which model of voting is correct but which is relevant to an understanding of voting behaviour in a particular time and place. Arising from this, we argue that a proper understanding of the aggregation of the individual preferences of the voter during the April 9, 2011 Senatorial election in Anambra State could better be appreciated within the context of the five voting models discussed above. These voting models will serve as our guide in the attempt to capture the interplay of forces behind the voting behaviour of the Anambra electorate during the 2011 senatorial election. Materials and Methods Data for this study was collected mainly through descriptive survey design. This was necessary so as to be able to capture the entire domain of the study. Consequently, both primary and secondary sources of data collection were explored. Primary sources of data was the questionnaire instrument and in depth interview. The questionnaire instrument enabled us to elicit information from the public on the problematic which the study seeks to unravel. The questionnaire instrument was structured along the close-ended format and administered in such a way that made it fairly representative of


27

all shades of opinion, interests and groups across the state. This was complemented with in-depth interview with some prominent actors in the politics of the state and colleagues who were involved as in the election as ad hoc returning and collation officers during the election. Secondary sources of data include information retrieved from journals, newspapers, magazines, etc.

The study covered the entire state which is made of 21 local governments grouped under three senatorial districts namely: Anambra North, Anambra South and Anambra Central. A sample size of six hundred and ninety was originally selected. The choice of six hundred and ninety as sample size is informed by the consideration of some human and financial factors (see Obasi, 1996). Also considering the homogenous composition of the state, our belief is that a sample of 600 is large, representative and reliable enough to allow us make generalizations. In constituting the sample we operationalised the indigenes of the state to include every person who is resident in the state irrespective of whether they are indigenes of the state or not. Since the state is inhabited mainly by Igbos who are mostly Christians, religion and tribe are taken as constants. The study adopted the multi-stage sampling method which involves sampling in successive stages such that at each stage, selection is made using any of the known probability sampling methods (see Biereenu-Nnabugwu, 2006,192). This was done to help us save time and cost. In the first stage, the study adopted the stratified sampling technique to get respondents from the three senatorial districts in the state. This was to ensure a fair representation of all shades of

opinion, interest and groups in the state. This ordinarily could have been lost to the chance factor (Obasi, 1996). In using the stratified sampling technique, the study further adopted the disproportional stratified sampling technique in the sense that the numerical strength of the senatorial districts were not considered in their representation into the sample. Thus in the distribution of the questionnaire the three senatorial districts got two hundred and thirty respectively. At the second stage, to easily reach the respondents, the study adopted the cluster sampling technique in the sense that two major towns from the different geographical areas of each senatorial district was selected. So Onitsha and Otuocha was picked from Anambra North, Nnewi and Ekwulobia was picked from Anambra South; Awka and Obosi was picked from Anambra Central. The choice of these major towns is also based on two major reasons. First, there seems to be a high concentration of people in these towns as a result of urbanization. Secondly, they occupy important positions in the socio economic and political setting of the state.

At the third stage, in each of the selected towns, the systematic sampling technique was adopted. We concentrated in the major areas and picked the respondents from there. In each street we started with the first house, skipped a number of houses and settled on the 10th house. We continued thus until we got all the required respondents from the major areas. The presentation and analysis of data were carried out using both descriptive qualitative and quantitative methods. While qualitative analysis was merely descriptive and theoretical, the quantitative method employed appropriate


28

statistical tools particularly the frequency distribution and simple percentages.

It suffices to note that the study suffered some limitations. First the study suffered slow rate of response from the respondents. Yet at the end of the exercise we were not able to retrieve all the questionnaires given to the respondents. Out of the six hundred and ninety questionnaire distributed, only six hundred were returned. Second, the study also suffered from shortage of finance. No doubt a study of this nature requires enough funding if possible from a donor agency to ensure a comprehensive study. Thirdly was the unwillingness of the staff of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to release some basic information needed for the study. However, it must be pointed out that spirited efforts were made to address some of these limitations. For example, we had to reply on newspapers to get some of the needed data when INEC officials were not forthcoming in releasing them. Also the involvement of some colleagues of the researcher as election ad hoc staff also enabled us to obtain valuable information. Data Presentation and Analysis Method of Data Analysis The returned questionnaires were sort by Senatorial zones before being entered into a spreadsheet for subsequent analysis. Prior to the commencement of data entry, a blank scored card questionnaire was coded and used to design the datasheet as well as guide the data entry exercise. The data entry was followed by data cleaning, which was carried out to ensure that all the data were correctly captured in the sheet to minimize entry error.

However, due to the structure of the questionnaire and the varied nature of the information sought, it was highly necessary to group sub-question with similar options, as a way of minimizing both the time spent in analysis and the bulkiness of the information generated. In essence, simple summary statistics was used principally. Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents This section discusses the demographics of the respondents such as gender, marital status, age, religion as well as literacy status. As could be seen from Table 1, about 57.6 percent represents the proportion of female voters that participated in the exercise from across the three Senatorial zones in Anambra State. Table 1: Gender and marital status

by Senatorial Zone S/No Senatorial Zone Gender Marital Status Total % of

Total Married Single Others1. North Male 67 16 5 88 14.7

Female 75 25 12 112 18.7

2. Central Male 59 16 6 81 13.5

Female 55 20 10 85 14.2

3. South Male 55 20 10 85 14.2

Female 83 24 8 115 19.1

Total 442 124 54 600 100.0

% of Total 70.3 20.7 9.0 100.0 Source: field survey, 2011. The table above shows further that the about 70.3 percent of the sample are married, 20.7 percent are single while 9.0 percent represents the category that is designated as others and they include all those that have divorced, separated or widowed. It is presumed that the bulk of those within the single marital status are youths.


29

Table 2: Literacy Level and Religion by Senatorial Zone

Table 2 is the presentation of religious affiliation and literate level of the electorates in Anambra State. The analysis on the table shows that about 47.5 percent of them are members of Roman Catholic sect, 26.7 percent are Anglicans, 15.8 percent are Pentecostals, 6.3 percent belong to Traditional African religion and 3.7 percent, others. The table further shows that about 64.9 of the entire electorate who voted in the election are literate while about 35.1 percent said they cannot read and write in any language. The implication of this is that on the average, the electorates are fairly literate enough to be able to decide whom to vote for. The average age of the respondents is 49 years. Understanding the April 09, 2011 Senatorial Election in Anambra State Generally the April 09, 2011 Senatorial Election in Anambra State attracted attention for various reasons. But prominent among them are the level of contestations that greeted the nomination process of the different parties and the caliber of

personalities involved in the electoral contest across the three senatorial districts in the State. As pointed out already the

primary election of the parties were marred with a lot of irregularities. In the PDP, the serving senators in Anambra south and central senatorial districts (i.e senators Ikechukwu Obiorah and Annie Okonkwo) had to decamp to Accord Party(AP) after alleging foul play in the nomination process. As a result of

the non transparent process of the nomination process in the PDP, the electorates were not certain of who were the party’s candidates for the election. In Anambra North senatorial district three prominent candidates- Prince John Emeka, Mrs. Margaret Okadigbo and the serving senator Prince Alphonsus Igbaeke all claimed to be the candidate for the election. In Anambra South Senatorial district two prominent candidates- Dr. Andy Uba and Prince C. Ukachukwu repeated the same thing.

In the All Progressive Grand Alliance the story was not different. The three candidates for the senatorial election –Senator Joy Emordi, Prof.Dora Akunyili and Mr. Chukwumaeze Nzeribe were all known members of the Peoples Democratic Party. The emergence of the candidates led to the exit of some main APGA faithfuls.

It was against this background of uncertainty and contestations that the senatorial election took place after INEC released a list of thirty-six candidates cleared for the election. Table 3 displays the final list of contestants cleared by INEC before the Election.

Total %

3.7 100.0

Source: field survey, 2011.


30

Source: INEC Office, Awka As indicated in table 3, there were twelve candidates in each Senatorial district but according to views expressed by the electorate not all were strong and prominent. In Anambra North Senatorial district the strong candidates were: Senator

Joy Emordi, Hon.Jessica Balonwu and Prince John Emeka.

In Anambra Central Senatorial district which was the most contentions contest, the strong candidates were: Dr. Chris Nwabueze Ngige a former governor of the state, Senator Annie Okonkwo the

1 ANAMBRA ANAMBRA NORTH JOY EMEORDI F APGA 55 LLB. BL

DR. AREH OKECHUKWU MIKE

HON. JESSICA BALONWU

JOHN C. NWADIOGBU

CHIEF OGBONNA C. EBEZE

OBI GODWIN OKEY

OKOLI ONYEBUCHI OBIOMA

DR. JOHN BOASAH

ODIFE DENIS

BARR CHINELO E. ONYEKWE

JOHN OKECHUKWUEMEKA

JONATHAN ONWUMELIE

B. PHARM

WASC, LLB, BL

WASC

GRADE II

B.ENGR.

BSC

MBBS

MBA

LLB

MBA

59

60

48

53

51

36

54

64

59

48

55

M

F

M

M

M

M

M

M

F

M

M

ACCORD

ACN

ANPP

ADC

APS

CDC

CPC

LABOUR

NTP

PDP

PPA

ANNIE C. OKONKWO

DR. CHRIS N. NGIGE

CHIEF KENNETH C. MODEKWE

CHUKWUNWEKE MADUEKWE

DORA NKEM AKUNYILI

OKAFOR IKECHUKWU

NWEKE EMMANUEL C.

OKOYE EMMANUEL CHIJIOKE

BARR IKE K. EZECHUKWU

NWOSU MIKE

IKECHUKWU OBIORAH

SIR CHRIS ATUEGWU

CHUKWUNWIKE NWEKE

NSUFOR IZUCHUKWU

CHIEF GEORGE NWADUBEN

CHUKWUMA EZE NZERIBE

CHRISTIAN IKECHUKWU OTI

PROF. NONSO MOJEKWU

AFAMA OKOYE

UMEOHA-IKE ESTHER

ANDY EMMANUEL UBA

CHIEF ADOPHUS IZUEGBU

M

M

M

M

M

F

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

F

M

M

M

ACCORD

ACN

ADC

ALP

ANPP

APGA

CDC

CPC

LABOUR

NTP

PDP

PPA

ACCORD

ACN

ADC

ALP

ANPP

APGA

CDC

CPC

LABOUR

PDP

PPA

HDP

DIPLOMA

WASC, MBBS

WASC

WASC

LLB, BL

BSC

BSC

WASC

LLB

B.ENGR.

LLM

55

58

52

37

50

56

35

50

51

50

55

43

49

65

49

48

51

44

52

41

43

53

46

LLB, BL

BSC

B.SC

HND ACCTING

HND ACCTING

HND

PHD

PHD

BSC

PHD

HND

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Table 3: INEC Senatorial 2011 Final List, Anambra State


31

S/No Senatorial Zone Voted in the election Total % of

Total Yes % No %

1. North 79

2. Central 100

3. South 100 Total 527

100 89.5 21 10.5 200

90.5 19 9.5 200181

83.5 33 16.5 200167

87.8 73 12.2 600 100

serving Senator, and Prof. Dora Akunyili a former minister of information. Finally in Anambra South Senatorial District, there were three prominent and strong candidates namely: Dr. Andy Uba a former special assistant to the president, Senator Ikechukwu Obiorah, and Chukwuma Nzeribe. It was in this sense that the election became a litmus test for all the Candidates and parties involved. Religious and community interest were at play. Some communities saw it as an opportunity for them to be represented in government. The churches were not left out as the different candidates toured the major churches in different parts of the State. At the end of the election, the following candidates were declared winners. Prince John Emeka (Anambra North), Dr.Chris Ngige (Anambra Central) and Dr.Andy Uba (Anambra South).Yet it is important to point out that several months after the election Prince John Emeka who was declared winner by INEC in Anambra North district, has not been sworn in following a court injunction obtained by Prince Alphosus Igbaeke. Recently the election tribunal has ordered a fresh election in Anambra South district following a petition by an aggrieved candidate in the election. In the two cases mentioned above, the main issue borders on the flawed processes of party primaries. Informed by the general problem and objectives stated from the onset, this section of the paper sets out to empirically examine the underlying factors behind the final outcome of the election. To properly achieve this we posed some questions to the respondents. First we wanted to find out if they participated in the election. We

therefore asked the question: Did you vote in the April 09, 2011 Senatorial election? Table 4: Number of Electorates that

actually voted in the Election

Source: field survey, 2011. Table 4 shows that over 87 percent voted in the 2011 Senatorial election across the three Senatorial Zones in Anambra State. The high turn out of voters could be attributed to the desire of the people to effect a positive change in the representation at the Senate. It further supports our earlier observation that there is among the people an emerging political culture of one man one vote which is conditioned by an environment of high level of political awareness (Alumona 2010,285). Further, we decided to find out why some did not vote in the elections. The responses from our respondents are presented in table 5. Table 5: Reason(s) for not voting in the Election

Source: field survey, 2011. Table 5 shows that impatience on the part of prospective voters accounted for 56.4 percent among the reasons presented for not

S/No Senatorial

Zone Actual reason for not voting Total % of

Total

problem

Could not

wait after

accreditation

Activities of Security

operatives

Yes % Yes % No %

1. North 7 33.3 10 47.6 4 19.0 21 100

2. Central 6 31.6 11 57.9 2 10.5 19

3. South 10 30.3 21 63.6 2 6.1 33

Total 23 31.7 42 56.4 8 11.9 73

100

100

100


32

voting in the election. However, there are variations along the Senatorial zones line. As the table further shows, 63.6 percent and 47.6 percent of those who did not vote from the South and North Senatorial zones respectively said they could not wait after accreditation. This observation brings out the issue of how the election was conducted. The time lag between the period of accreditation and actual voting was so long that prospective voters became impatient and left the polling booth. As pointed out in our theoretical framework the literature on voting behaviour is dominated with several reason(s) why people vote in a particular way. In the context of the problem which this study sets out unravel, we asked our respondents: what factor(s) did you consider most important while voting for candidates during the election. The responses to this question are presented in table 6. Table 6: Determining factor for Choice of Candidate

Source: field survey, 2011. Table 6 shows that on the average, about 51.5 percent of the electorates across the three senatorial voted for their candidates on the bases of candidate’s image/

record/personality, 23.5 percent considered religious affiliation more than any other factor in choosing whom to vote for. It is also interesting to discover that as much as 11.3 percent had their choices influenced by community interest while 9.7 percent said they considered party interest as their

determining factor. It is worthy of mention that image or track record achievement played a dominant role in choosing candidate to be voted in the elections. This finding is not surprising because most of the candidates that stood for the election in the three senatorial districts are of high standing in terms of image and track record. Scholars have demonstrated that the greatest problem for democratic consolidation in Nigeria has to do with the administrative framework within which elections are organized (Chukwu 2005, Omotola 2010,). Specifically after the 2007 general election, it was observed that poor organization, late arrival of voting materials and polling officials, stealing of sensitive polling materials and under age voting marred the conduct of the election. Informed by this above situation which also formed part of the problem of this study, we decided to ask the respondents few questions that would help us understand the administrative and institutional context involved in the determination of who got

what and why during the election. First we ask them: what is your perception about the overall conduct of the election. The responses from the respondents are presented in table

Table 7 shows that 11.5 percent of the respondents across the Senatorial zones perceived the conduct of the 2011 senatorial election to be very good, 67.5 percent perceived the conduct perceived the conduct to be good, 6.2 percent said poor and an insignificant proportion of 3.3 said the conduct was very poor. Further, we asked them: what factor(s) affected the conduct of the election negatively. The responses we got are presented in table 8 below.

S/No Senatorial Zone

Determining factors Others Total Party

interest Religious

Interest

1. North 14 105 51 21 9 200

2. Central 9 127 49 10 5 200

3. South 35 77 41 37 10 200

Total 58 309 141 68 24 600

% of total 9.7 51.5 23.5 11.3 4.0 100

Interest Community


33

As could be seen from Table 8, late arrival of election materials and officials at the polling centers across the Senatorial zones accounted for 46.8 percent of all the factors under consideration. About 26.3 percent said the problem was really on the part of the voters who could not exercise patience to wait for the voting proper to commence after accreditation had take place. About 8.6 percent and 7.7 percent represents the opinion of those who said the problem was more on the side of activities of party agents/supporters and the conduct of INEC officials respectively. Against the background of an adequate understanding of the role of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in the election, we still asked our respondents to rate the commission’s performance in three core

activities during the election. The responses

we got are presented in table 9 below. Table 9 shows that on the average, about 21.6 percent of the respondents across the three Senatorial zones said that INEC performance in the 2011 Senatorial election was very good, 35.3 percent said it was good, 33.2 percent said it was fair while 9.9 percent said it was poor. However, within the Central Senatorial Zone, about 49.5 percent said that INEC’s

performance in the collation and announcement of results were just fair whereas, comparatively, 17 percent and 16.5 percent said felt the same way from North and South Senatorial zones respectively.

Total

59 52 47 158 26.3


34

As could be seen from Table 10, about 63.8 percent of the respondents across the three senatorial zones said that the 2011 Senatorial election in Anambra State was an improvement from previous experience, 23.8 percent said it was not, while 12.3 percent were indifferent. It is worthy to mention that the views expressed by the respondents are in tandem with the widely held popular opinion that there is an improvement in the conduct of election by the Independent National Electoral Commission. Conclusion We started on the premise that the issue of who got what and why during the April 09, 2010 Senatorial election in Anambra State hinges on four significant dimensions:

the involvement of most of the major political gladiators in the State in the election, the deep contestations among the different candidates for the tickets of the parties which brought to fore the lack of internal democracy among the parties, the nature of electioneering campaigns which exposed a lot of issues bordering on religious and community interest, and finally the management of the election by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Using the different models of voting behavior as discussed by Miller (1992), we tried to understand the underlying factors behind the emergence of candidates in the election. Essentially, we found out that voters were mainly influenced by the personality and performance factor in their selection of candidates during the election. Arising from this, it could be argued that those who won the election were candidates whose


35

personality and previous performance were close to what the voters felt could bring the desired change in the pattern of representation. Against the protestations of the conduct of the party primaries in the different political parties which led to exit of many gladiators from their parties, we recommend a genuine process of reformation of the internal organization of the parties as this will help to stabilize the electoral process and enhance democratic consolidation. References Alumona, Ikenna (2010), “The February 6,

2010 Gubernatorial Election in Anambra State, Nigeria: A Study in Political Behaviour” Paskistan Journal of Social Sciences. 7 (3).

Biereenu-Nnabugwu, M (2006) Methodology of Political Inquiry. Enugu: Quintagon Publishers

Butler, D.E and Rose Richard (1960), The British General Election of 1959. London: Macmillan and Co. Ltd.

Chukwu, P.C (2005), “The 1999 Constitution and the Independence of INEC in the conduct and Supervision of electoral Process in Nigeria” In Onu, G. and Momoh,

A.(eds.) Elections and Democratic Consolidation in Nigeria. Lagos: A Publication of Nigerian Political Science Association.

Ekeh, Peter et al (eds.)(1989), Nigeria since Independence: the first 25 years. Vol. V: Politics and Constitution. Ibadan: Heinemann Educational Books.

Gordon, S.C and Landa, L. (2009), “Do the

advantages of Incumbency advantage incumbents?”. Social Science Research Network. http://www.columbia.edu/ktr 2102/papers/s-gordon.pdf.

Miller, W.L (1992),’’Political Participation

and Voting behaviour” In Mary

Hwaesworth and Maurice Kogan (eds.) Encyclopedia of Government and Politics. Vol.1.London and New York: Routlege

Obasi, Isaac (1996), Research Methodology in Political Science. Enugu: Academic Publishing Company.

Omotola, Shola (2010), ’’Elections and

Democratic Transition in Nigeria under the Fourth Republic’’.

African Affairs.109.(437):535-553. Osaghae, Eghosa (2005), Nigeria Since

Independence: Crippled Giant. Ibadan: John Archers Publishers.

Post, W.K. (1963), The Nigerian Federal Election of 1959. London: Oxford University Press.

Documents

Who Got What, How and Why: An Analysis of the April 9 ...and Robinson in Ekeh, 1989, 123). Every election is held within two contexts, the political and social relationships in the