Friday, 29 April 2011

Preliminary Statement issued by the National Human Rights Commission and the CLEEN Foundation on the Conduct of Security Officials in the Gubernatorial and State House of Assembly Elections held on April 26, 2011



INTRODUCTION

In continuation of our observation of conduct of security officials in the April general elections in Nigeria, which began with the National Assembly elections on April 9, 2011, the National Human Rights Commission and the CLEEN Foundation, with support from the Open Society Initiative for West Africa (OSIWA) and the UNDP observed the gubernatorial and state assembly elections held on April 26, 2011 in 34 states across Nigeria.

As elaborated in our previous statements, the election security observation project was necessitated by widespread concerns among stakeholders rising insecurity in Nigeria in the build up to the April elections and the actions/inactions of security agencies in responding to threats and actual incidents of electoral violence, which cumulatively had contributed in giving previous elections in the country a bad name amongst the electorate and observer groups within and outside the country.

The most recent dramatic signposts of concerns about election security were the election eve bombing of INEC office in Suleja, Niger State on April 8, which killed and injured a number of youth corpers among other INEC officials and the post-presidential election violence in some Northern states, which led to brutal killing of many people and large-scale destruction of property. These incidents underscored the need to pay special attention to security and security officials in the gubernatorial and state assembly elections, which we did, focusing on the performance and conduct of the police, Federal Road Safety Commission, Civil Defence Corp, Immigration Service, Custom Service, Prison Service and the armed forces in ensuring adequate security during the elections.

The preliminary reports on the conduct of security officials in the National Assembly elections and presidential elections were released on April 12th and 19th respectively. Today, we present the preliminary report on the gubernatorial and state house of assembly elections.

The Functions of Security Agencies During Elections


The election security observation exercise was guided by the Guidelines issued by the Police Service Commission on conduct of police officials during elections, which identified six major function areas relevant to all security agencies involved in the electoral process. These are:

1. Safeguarding the security of lives and property of citizens during campaign and voting, so that citizens will not feel unsafe on account of holding, associating with or expressing a political opinion;
2. Ensuring the safety of electoral officers before, during and after elections;
3. Providing security for candidates during campaigns and elections;
4. Ensuring and preserving a free, fair, safe and lawful atmosphere for campaigning by all parties and candidates without discrimination;
5. Maintaining peaceful conditions, law and order around the polling and counting
centres;
6. Providing security for electoral officials at voting and counting centres; and ensuring the security of election materials at voting and counting centres and during their transportation thereto. It is the duty of the police to ensure that election materials are not stolen, hijacked, destroyed or fraudulently altered by any group or person.

In carrying out these functions security agents are expected to exhibit the qualities of alertness, approachability, professionalism, impartiality, fairness, restraint in the use of force, prompt communication with superior in event of imminent security threat, adequate knowledge of the electoral law, wearing of identification tag, and collaboration and cooperation with relevant legitimate electoral, security and civil society officials. We paid attention to these principles in our observations.

Methodology

Observers were deployed across the 34 states of Nigeria in which elections held on April 26th.Majority of them were stationed in particular polling stations to observe conduct of security officials from the time they arrived to the end of the elections. The remaining were roving observers who covered each of the three senatorial districts in a state. However, the selection of polling stations that were observed was based on purposive rather than random sampling methodology.

The checklists used in the observation consisted largely of close-ended questions to enable generation of quantitative measurement of the findings. However, incident sheets were also provided to enable recording of particular incidents the observers witnessed. The checklist has a total of 26 questions, designed to elicit answers to questions on punctuality, professionalism, impartiality, politeness and alertness of the security officials in each polling units. Observers were to complete the checklist through observation and interview of randomly selected voters and security officials in each poling unit.

A total of 3,619 polling units across Nigeria were observed during the Governorship/House of Assembly election. The findings that follow are based on analysis of 1004 checklists that were retrieved on time for this preliminary report and media reports on the elections. Caution is advised on generalisations based on the findings given the small number of polling stations observed, the preliminary nature of this statement and more importantly the use of
convenience rather than classical random sampling methodology in the observation.

However, the report provides important insights and analysis that have not been explored elsewhere.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Punctuality
Reports from our observers indicated that in 58% of polling units, security officials arrived before 8.00am when polling was supposed to commence while 25% arrived between 8 and 9 am. This result shows a drop in the level of punctuality recorded in the Presidential elections.
However, like in the presidential elections, the Southeast and South-South zones had the highest percentage of polling units where security officials arrived after 8am when voting was expected to have commenced. Security officials were also reported to have remained in the polling units until the end of the voting exercise in most polling units. Only in 16% of polling units did security officials leave the polling units during the elections. This is consistent with the improvement observed in the presidential elections, which was attributed to the availability of food and refreshments around the vicinity of polling units. Most of polling units (82%) were manned by security officials throughout the duration of the Governorship/House of Assembly elections.

2. Deployment
Generally, 3 or more security officials were deployed to the 38% of polling units and 37% of polling unit had at least 2 security officials. This was a slight improvement in the level of deployment recorded in the presidential elections. The North Central (53%) and South-South (45%) had the highest percentage of polling unit with 3 and above security officials. Remarkably however, 1 polling unit in the South-South zone was reported as not having a security official during the election. Like in the presidential elections, observers were predominantly of the view that the polling units had ‘very adequate’ (25%) and ‘adequate’ (57%) number of security officials. The security officials were easily identifiable in 82% of polling units with nametags. The North West (19%), South East (14%) and South South (11%) zones remarkably had the highest percentage of polling units where security officials were reported to be without nametags. It is not clear whether this is an indication of fake security personnel since all proper security personnel used during the elections should wear easily identifiable tags.

3. Conduct of the security officials at the polls
The observers continued to express satisfaction at the conduct of security officials in most of the polling units monitored. This is because security officials were considered ‘approachable’ and ‘very approachable’ in cumulative 92% of polling units. Moreover, security officials in most of the polling units were considered to have been impartial in the discharge of their duties. Only in 4% of polling units were security officials deemed to have been partial in the
discharge of their duties. It is important however to note the regional variation in the South West zone where 12% of polling units had security officials who were considered to be ‘not impartial at all’. Like in the presidential elections, observers reported that 72% of polling units had security officials that followed instructions of presiding officials during the elections. As observed in the presidential elections, this percentage is, regrettably relatively lower than the compliance
rate (78%) recorded at the National Assembly elections. The North West (25%), South East (16%) and South-South (16%) zones recorded the highest percentage of polling units where security officials reportedly failed to comply with instructions of presiding officials. Still, in most of the polling units (93%) observers rated the conduct of security officials as ‘fair’, ‘good’ and ‘very good’. It is believed that this commendable performance of the security agencies can be attributed to trainings and sensitisation carried out by both the Nigeria Police
Force and other stakeholders to prepare them for their duties during elections.

4. Safety and security of the polling units
The expression of satisfaction about the conduct of security officials arises from the perception of observers that the security officials provided the required security for the polling units. It would be recalled that the safety and security of polling units was a major source of concern as Nigerians prepared to vote in the gubernatorial and house of assembly elections. It was feared that the bloody post presidential election violence would reverse some of the security dividends of the modified open ballot system reported in earlier elections. Observer reports however show that most polling units (95%) were considered to be safe and
secure during the elections. Only in the South East was up to 3% of polling units considered to be unsafe. Furthermore, observers reported that polling units were mostly ‘very orderly’ (29%) and ‘orderly’ (58%). This is consistent with findings of previous elections.

The perceived slight improvement in sense of security of polling units is also evidenced by the fact that only 9% of polling units, as against 13% and 10% reported respectively in the parliamentary and presidential elections, witnessed incidents considered as threats to security. These incidents were however contained as security officials were adjudged to have handled the threats well in 78% of polling units. There was however significant regional variations as
observers in the South East (11%) and South-South zones (8%) were least satisfied with the way the security officials handled the security threats. The poor reputation of security officials in the two southern zones in the area of responding to threats is consistent with observations of the last presidential elections. It is also important to note that the degree of satisfaction with the response of security officials to the threats is much lower than what obtained in the previous elections.

The reports of our observers are confirmed by media reports of increased levels of political violence during the gubernatorial and house of assembly elections in various parts of the country. Unlike in previous elections, most of the security threats appeared to have occurred at the polling units where ballot papers and boxes were snatched. This is not surprising given the greater number of contestants and interests and high stakes in the just concluded elections. While the security agencies rose to the occasion, in a number of cases they were reported to have been perpetrators and accomplices of electoral fraud in a number of cases.
`
5. Security to collation centres
The observation reports showed that there was no improvement in provision of security to the collation centres. On the contrary, like in the presidential elections, the security officials were reported to have accompanied polling officers and election materials to collation centres from 54% of polling units, a drop from 66% recorded in the parliamentary elections. This anomaly and breach of security was most common in all the zones, as observers could not affirm that security officials accompanied pooling officers and materials to collation centres. Unfortunately, we are compelled to restate that security of election material and personnel to
collation officers remained the weakest link during the presidential elections as in the National Assembly elections. It also constituted the weakest link in the Gov/House of Assembly elections resulting in most of the allegations that results were being manipulated between the polling stations and the collation centers.

6. Impact of post-election violence
Although there were assurances of improved security following the arrests, detentions and restriction of movements in various parts of the country and postponement of elections in two states as a result of the violence that followed the presidential elections, the mayhem scarred many voters away from the polling units. This resulted in reported low voter turnout in various parts of the country, especially in the North. Even in areas not affected by the violence, heavy troop deployments impacted negatively on the electoral process, as it tended to favour incumbents in some states.

7. Welfare of security officials
Adequate provision for welfare of security officials is imperative for the conduct of free and fair elections, as it will likely insulate security officials from corruptible offers of politicians. As in previous elections, observers noted complaints of security officials on the non-payment of allowances in some states of the federation.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The Gubernatorial and State Houses of Assembly elections have gone generally well and rightly been adjudged to be substantially free, fair and credible. However, election observation conducted by the National Human Rights Commission and CLEEN Foundation revealed a number of lessons especially in the conduct of security officials that need to be addressed to guarantee the success of future elections in Nigeria. While noting that recommendations made in our preliminary statements on the National Assembly and presidential elections on Mandate Protection and Early deployment of security officials have
been addressed, we wish to restate pending recommendations and raise new ones as follows:

I. Proper Management of Deployment of Security Personnel
There is still evidence of disproportionate deployment of security personnel in favour of urban areas. Whereas rigging of elections are now generally widespread in rural areas and difficult terrains. Improved deployment would be better managed under a joint deployment arrangement and coordination.

II. Prosecution of suspected partial security officials
Press reports and observation reports show that in several states of the federation, some security officials were alleged to have supervised electoral fraud or provided security for perpetrators of electoral fraud. We reiterate the call for investigation of all suspected cases of compromise by officials and prosecution of officials found guilty. We restate our recommendation for a comprehensive review of the performance of security officials
especially in Benue, Plateau, Kebbi, Anambra, Akwa Ibom, Abia, Imo, Cross River, Ogun, Delta and Rivers states as there was no evidence of improvement of conduct by security officials stationed in these states.

III. Timely prosecution of election rule offenders
Open trial of suspected violators of election regulations arrested in the last election will help check security breaches and enhanced credibility of the role of the security agencies on elections. It is particularly important that the security agencies are seen as having made some progress in arresting the masterminds, if any, of the post-election violence to restore confidence in the electoral process.

IV. Post-election reviews
As the 2011 elections are now almost over, it is incumbent on security agencies that participated in the elections to embark on a post-election review of security during the 2011 elections. The review should be comprehensive and aimed at exposing lessons learned to enhance performance in future elections.

V. Special protection of security officials
The leadership of security agencies involved in the elections should take appropriate steps to provide security for election security officials. Cases where politicians or their thugs were accused of assaulting security officials should be invested and those found guilty punished according to the law notwithstanding their position in society.

VI. Payment of entitlement of security officials
Finally, we restate our recommendation that authorities of security agencies should ensure that funds allocated for transportation and feeding allowances of security officials are disbursed before election day to enhance morale of the officials and promote the integrity of the electoral process.

CONCLUSION
The National Human Rights Commission and the CLEEN Foundation are very grateful to the media for their support during the process of observing the conduct of security personnel during the elections. We shall be meeting you again to give our final report on the election security observation project for the 2011 general elections within the next one month.

Tony Ojukwu Esq.                                                                  Innocent Chukwuma
Project Coordinator, NHRC/UNDP                                      Executive Director
Election Security Project                                                      CLEEN Foundation
National Human Rights Commission

Tuesday, 19 April 2011

Preliminary Statement issued by the National Human Rights Commission and the CLEEN Foundation on the Conduct of Security Officials in the Presidential Election held on April 16, 2011


 Background

Free, fair and credible election requires the guarantee of the security of people and materials involved in the electoral process. The personnel of the electoral management body, politicians, electorates and the general public should be protected from violence and intimidation during voter registration, campaigns, primaries, polling, collation and declaration of results and post-election dispute resolution. In addition, the safety of the election materials should be guaranteed.
Past elections in Nigeria were generally characterised by violence due to political intolerance, lapses in the conduct of the elections as well as inadequate, ineffective, partial and generally unprofessional security personnel at the polling units and collation centres. Beside violence, there have also been reports of partiality and the involvement of security officials in several electoral malpractices, including ballot box snatching and stuffing, disruption of voting and alteration of election results. These security lapses and challenges contributed to the lack of credibility associated with past elections in the country.

A preliminary report on the conduct of security officials during the last parliamentary was released last week. Today, we present the preliminary report on the observation of the conduct of security personnel during the presidential election held on April 16th 2011.  We are aware that the Police Service Commission has also deployed its staff to monitor the conduct of the police on election duties. We hope that the two reports will serve as basis for enhancing the performance of the security agencies in the professional policing of elections as required by democratic practices.

Prior to the April 2011 elections, there were concerns about the state of security as incidences of violence were recorded in different parts of the country. There were cases of bombing of public spaces leading to scores of deaths; maiming and assassination of political aspirants; contradictory directives by INEC and security chiefs on whether voters should stay at the polling stations or go after voting; and the disappointing postponement of the national assembly elections from April 2 to 9 due to logistics problems faced by INEC. The most dramatic incidences of violence were the election eve and Election Day bombings of INEC offices in Suleja, Niger State and Maiduguri, Bornu State respectively. Whereas the Suleja incident killed and injured a number of persons, among other INEC officials, the Maiduguri incident recorded no loss of life. These and other incidences of violence scared people away from exercising their franchise and heightened tension in the polity thus underscoring the need to pay special attention to security and security officials in the elections.

In the on-going elections, the National Human Rights Commission and CLEEN Foundation, with support from OSIWA and the UNDP, are collaborating to observe the conduct of security personnel deployed for election duties and not just the police as was the practice in the past. The need to extend the exercise to other security agencies involved in elections is based on the fact that they all play important and complementary role to the police during elections. Several security agencies have become very visible in their functions at polling stations in the fourth republic elections. These agencies include Federal Road Safety Commission, Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corp, Nigeria Immigration Service, Nigeria Custom Service, Nigeria Prison Service and the Nigerian Army which complemented the Police in election security duties

The functions of security agencies during elections

The Guideline issued by the Police Service Commission identified six major function areas for the police during elections, which are relevant to all security agencies involved in the electoral process. These are:
1.      Safeguarding the security of lives and property of citizens during campaign and voting, so that citizens will not feel unsafe on account of holding, associating with or expressing a political opinion;
2.      Ensuring the safety of electoral officers before, during and after elections;
3.      Providing security for candidates during campaigns and elections;
4.      Ensuring and preserving a free, fair, safe and lawful atmosphere for campaigning by all parties and candidates without discrimination;
5.      Maintaining peaceful conditions, law and order around the polling and counting centres;
6.      Providing security for electoral officials at voting and counting centres; and ensuring the security of election materials at voting and counting centres and during their transportation thereto. It is the duty of the police to ensure that election materials are not stolen, hijacked, destroyed or fraudulently altered by any group or person.

In carrying out these functions, security agents are expected to exhibit the qualities of alertness, approachability, professionalism, impartiality, fairness, restraint in the use of force, prompt communication with superiors in event of imminent security threat, adequate knowledge of the electoral law, wearing of identification tag, and collaboration and cooperation with relevant legitimate electoral, security and civil society officials. These were the qualities and factors we paid special attention to in observing the conduct of security officials during the national assembly election of April 9, 2011 and the presidential election of April 16, 2011 across the country.


METHODOLOGY

Observers were deployed across the 36 states of Nigeria and Abuja the Federal Capital Territory. Majority of them were stationed in particular polling stations to observe conduct of security officials from the time they arrived to the end of the elections. The remaining were roving observers who covered each of the three senatorial districts in a state. However, the selection of polling stations that were observed was based on purposive rather than random sampling methodology.

The checklists used in the observation consisted largely of close-ended questions to enable generation of quantitative measurement of the findings. However, incident sheets were also provided to enable recording of particular incidents the observers witnessed. The checklist has a total of 26 questions, designed to elicit answers to questions on punctuality, professionalism, use of force, impartiality, politeness and alertness of the security officials in each polling unit. Observers were to complete the checklist through observation and interview of randomly selected voters and security officials in each poling unit.

A total of 3,992 completed questionnaires were returned indicating that 3,992 polling units across Nigeria were observed during the presidential election. However for the purpose of this preliminary report a random sample of 964 completed questionnaires were analysed for the Preliminary report. The findings that follow are based on analysis of the checklists and media reports on the elections. Caution is advised on generalisations based on the findings given the small number of polling stations observed, the preliminary nature of this statement and more importantly the use of convenience rather than classical random sampling methodology in the observation. However, the report provides important insights and analysis that have not been explored elsewhere.

FindinGs and Recommendations


1.      Punctuality
Observation reports indicated that security officials arrived 65% of the polling units before 8.00am when polling was supposed to commence while 26% arrived between 8 and 9 am. This result shows an improvement on level of punctuality recorded in the National Assembly elections. Generally, the South-East and South-South zones had the highest percentage of polling units where security officials arrived after 8 am when voting was expected to have commenced. Security officials were also reported to have remained in the polling units until the end of the voting exercise in most polling units. Only in 17% of polling units did security officials leave the polling units during the elections. This also represents a slight improvement on the National Assembly elections in which observers reported that security officials left 27% of polling units during the election. The improvement can be attributed to the presence of food and drink vendors at polling units that was obviously a market response to the observed demand for refreshments at polling units during the National Assembly elections. Like in the previous election, observers reported that most of polling units (79%) were manned by security officials throughout the duration of the polls.

2.      Deployment
Generally, 3 or more security officials were deployed to the 35% of polling units and 36% of polling unit had at least 2 security officials. Consequently, 51% of polling units were deemed to have ‘adequate’ security while another 26% were said to have ‘very adequate’ security. The South-South zone had the highest number of polling units with three and above security officials (62%), while the South East zone had the lowest (25%). The security officials were easily identifiable in 83% of polling units with nametags. The northern zones remarkably had the highest percentage of polling units where security officials were reported to be without nametags. Reports from observers showed that all the polling stations in the city centers had adequate security personnel while some polling stations in the suburbs and hinterland had fewer or no security personnel deployed to them.

3.      Conduct of the security officials at the polls
The observers also reported that the conduct of security officials was in most cases satisfactory, consistent with observations in the National Assembly elections. Most of the polling units were recorded to have security officials whose overall conduct was rated to be ‘good’ (58%) and ‘very good’ (23%). The friendly disposition of security officials was noticeable in most of the polling units with observers recording that they found the security officials ‘very approachable’ (92%). This disposition of security personnel can be attributed to sustained sensitisation and training of security personnel deployed on electoral duties for 2011 general elections by the National Human Rights Commission, CLEEN Foundation, civil society groups and other stakeholders.   The same percentage of polling units recorded security officials who were considered to have been ‘impartial’ and ‘very impartial’ during the polls. However, there was significant variance in perception of partiality or otherwise of security officials across the states. States with highest record of polling units where security officials were considered partial are Benue (50%), Ogun (40%), Akwa Ibom (23%), Cross River (23%), Anambra (20%) and Kebbi (18%). To these states must be added Delta and Rivers States where observers curiously did not record perception of partiality of security officials.

In most of polling units (72%), security officials were reported to have followed instructions of presiding officials during the elections. This percentage is, however, relatively lower than the compliance rate (78%) recorded at the National Assembly elections. The North Central (15%) and South South (11%) zones recorded the largest percentage of polling units where security officials reportedly failed to comply with instructions of presiding officials.  This trend probably also explains the drop in percentage of polling units in which observers were willing to recommend security officials for recognition from 70% recorded in the parliamentary elections to 50% in the presidential elections.


4.      Safety and security of the polling units
Safety and security of polling units is a very important precondition for conducting free, fair and credible elections. This explains why safety of polling units was one of the major areas of concern before the commencement of the 2011 elections, especially the controversy over the security implications of the modified open ballot system. The relative sense of security reported in the National Assembly elections expectedly rubbed off on the presidential elections as voters were perceived to have felt safe and secured in most of the polling units (86%). Only an infinitesimal 1% of polling units was considered ‘not safe and secure at all’. Again, observers noted that the presence of voters at the polling units throughout the duration of the polls engendered a greater sense of security even for the INEC officials who could easily be overpowered by hoodlums and party agents if left alone after voting.

The perceived slight improvement in sense of security of polling units is also evidenced by the fact that only 10% of polling units, as against 13% reported in the National Assembly elections, witnessed incidents considered as threats to security. Security officials were also credited to have handled the threats in a commendable manner with minimal cases (6%) in which force was used. The North Central (12%) and North East (10%) had the highest percentage of poling units were security officials were considered to have used force. This is probably due to the reported incidences of violence in these zones during the elections. Consistent with reports on the National Assembly elections, most of the observers considered the degree of force applied to be proportionate to the level of threat.  The minimal use of force at the polls stemmed from the high rate of compliance of security officials with election guidelines on firearms at polling units following adequate training by stakeholders on human rights standards expected of security personnel on election duties.

However, new security threats were identified in the presidential elections. These include cases of reported kidnap and arrest of election observers by security agents and political thugs as well as an isolated incident of kidnap of a female voter in a polling unit in Enugu State. Generally observers were warned across the states by both security personnel and voters to be more careful during the Governorship/House of Assembly elections as tensions are very high in the states on the outcome of the elections of 26th April.

5.      Security (to)at collation centres
The observation reports showed that there was no improvement in provision of security (to)at the collation centres. On the contrary, the security officials were reported to have accompanied polling officers and election materials to collation centres from 54% of polling units, a drop from 66% recorded in the parliamentary elections. This anomaly and breach of security was most common in the North Central and South South zones. Thus, security of election materials and personnel to (at) collation officers remained the weakest link during the presidential elections as in the National Assembly elections.



6.      Security implications of high voter turn-out
Observation reports also indicated that the relatively higher voter turn-out recorded in the presidential elections in some parts of the country generated a security challenge. The inability of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to provide ‘baby’ polling units in overpopulated polling units, as promised, contributed to the prolongation of the accreditation of registered voters and disenfranchisement of voters across the country. The struggle among eager voters to get accredited before 12 noon created an atmosphere of disorder in a considerable proportion of polling units with more than 500 registered voters.

7.      Post-election violence
Although the presidential election was conducted in a relatively free and peaceful atmosphere, it was marred by post-election violence in several towns in Northern Nigeria. The violence was the spontaneous reaction of supporters of the main opposition candidate to early announcement of results, which showed that their preferred candidate was trailing behind the incumbent president.    The rapid spread of the violent protests and significant loss of lives and property suggest that the early warning system for post-election conflict was not very effective. It is gladdening that the security agencies have taken swift measures to prevent further spread of the violence.

8.      Welfare of security officials
Adequate provision for welfare of security officials is imperative for the conduct of free and fair elections as it will likely insulate security officials from corruptible offers of politicians. Observers noted complaints of security officials on the non-payment of allowances in some states of the federation. The reported boycott of election duties by security officials in Lagos State was a case in point.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Presidential election has generally and rightly been adjudged to be substantially free, free and credible. However, election observation conducted by the National Human Rights Commission and CLEEN Foundation revealed a number of lessons especially in the conduct of security officials, that need to be addressed to guarantee the success of the upcoming gubernatorial and house of assembly elections.  While noting that recommendations made in our preliminary statement on the National Assembly elections on Mandate Protection and Early deployment of security officials have been addressed, we wish to restate pending recommendations and raise new ones as follows:

        I.            Security reinforcement during movement to collation centres
Reports of sporadic snatching of ballot boxes during the movement to collation centres suggests the need for reinforcement by armed escorts during transport of results to collation centres.

     II.            Redeployment of suspected partial security officials
In cases where security officials played suspected partisan roles such officials should be redeployed and investigated accordingly. There is need for a comprehensive review of the performance of security officials especially in Benue, Plateau, Kebbi, Anambra, Akwa Ibom, Abia, Imo, Cross River, Ogun, Delta and Rivers states. This is particularly important as alleged partisanship of some security officials is likely to have a very negative impact on the forthcoming gubernatorial elections.

   III.            Enforcement of Regulations on firearms
The absence of firearms at the polling units enhanced security and more effective management of conflict. This regulation, especially the regulation which prohibits incumbents from coming to the polling units with armed escorts, should be enforced.

   IV.            Timely prosecution of election rule offenders
Early and open trial of suspected violators of election regulations arrested in the last election will help check security breaches and enhanced credibility of the role of the security agencies on elections. It is particularly important that the security agencies are seen as having made some progress in arresting the masterminds, if any, of the post-election violence to restore confidence in the electoral process.

     V.            Post-election reviews
Security agencies should embark on post-election review of security after each election with inputs from political parties, independent observers, INEC Monitors, religious leaders and the mass media.

   VI.            Early warning system
The unfortunate incidents of post-election violent conflict call for the strengthening of the early warning system. Security agencies need to improve on intelligence gathering. Since observers have been warned generally on the tension in the various states on the April 26 Governorship/HA elections, there is need for security agencies involved in managing security deployments during the April 26 elections to make extra security arrangements. They should deploy security personnel to both polling stations in city centers, suburbs and hinterland LGA’s etc, provide adequate communication equipment to security personnel for quick response to security alerts and deploy more operational mobile units to support increased demands for assistance from security personnel at the polling stations.

VII.            Special protection of election observers
The leadership of security agencies involved in the elections should take appropriate steps to provide security for election observers and discipline security officials involved in the violating the rights of election observers.

VIII.            Payment of entitlement of security officials
Authorities of security agencies should ensure that funds allocated for transportation and feeding allowances of security officials are disbursed before election day to enhance morale of the officials and promote the integrity of the electoral process.

Tony Ojukwu Esq.                                                               ‘Kemi Okenyodo
Project Coordinator, NHRC/UNDP                                   Deputy Executive Director
Election Security Project                                                      CLEEN Foundation
National Human Rights Commission

Thursday, 14 April 2011

INTRODUCTION OF CLEEN FACILITIES



The CLEEN Foundation is a non governmental organization aimed at promoting public safety, security and accessible justice in Nigeria. In a bid to raise funds and sustain the organization, CLEEN Foundation would like to inform the public that a number of facilities which could be hired at a token fee exist in its premises at no 21 Akinsanya Street Ojodu, besides federal Road safety Commission (FRSC).

Cleen has a variety of extraordinary and unique spaces that would make any private event unforgettable. Whether a training or corporate event, our team will work with you to identify the ideal space for you and your guests’ needs.

1-Hall - 40 seater air conditioned hall suitable for learning and all sorts of meetings; standby generator, projector, screen, magnetic board and adequate parking space. It is ideal for Board Meeting, Conference/Meeting, Business Meeting, Launches, Team-building and special presentation. Rates are affordable and too good to be true. A truly unique place to have an event!

2-Projector - We know there are plenty of things to worry about when planning training events or other special occasions we rent out projector. We provide projector for events purposes such as:  Training, Seminar, Workshop, Press Conference, Meeting, Office presentation, Product presentation (Celebrants, Individual, Trainers, Public Speakers, NGO’s, Barrister, Clubs, Schools and Companies)

3-Bus - 14 seater air conditioned bus to suit all your local transportation demands.

4-Guess House – 3 bed room guess house with standby generator and self catering facilities.

Why don’t you do business with us today, we are constantly open to receive your orders.

For any further information or additional questions you may have regarding renting our facilities, call Gabriel on 08023704048 or email newsletter@cleen.org to make your next event the talk of the town.

We look forward to hearing from you, to explore the exciting facilities that CLEEN has to offer.              

Total Pageviews

Followers

Amazon Contextual Product Ads