Original article available at:
The above written article
makes a bold case that 13.5m Nigerians voted manually in 2015 and that this
largely favoured the APC. The main argument put forward is that the states
which were won by the APC had the highest number of PVC only accreditations which
it
refers to as manual accreditations. The following paragraphs is lifted
directly from the said article. “Out of this number, 10,184,720 votes are
from states won by Buhari and 3,351,591 votes came from states won by Jonathan,
the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate, representing 75 percent and 25
percent of accredited voters respectively.” This simplistic approach
gives an impression that one party overwhelmingly benefitted from manual
accreditation over others. However we have taken a look at the data and made
assessments to see if this assertion is factual, accurate and representative of
the actual situation.
Firstly it is important to
note that manual accreditation is wrongly defined in the said article therefore
creating chasms into the very foundation of the entire article. The article
refers to manual accreditation as being equal to 13.5m which looking at the
data from the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) this figure
(exact is 13,377,340) actually refers to the total number of voters accredited
using PVC only accreditation. It’s important to state that this is still biometric
accreditation meaning that permanent voter cards were presented and
authenticated before voters were allowed to vote. While this is not full
biometric voter accreditation it is definitely not manual accreditation because
the PVCs were authenticated by the smart card reader. What this means is that
the voters were actually at the polling units in person. Therefore
characterizing these as manual accreditations is not only factually incorrect,
it is misleading and should be corrected immediately.
Secondly taking a look at
the actual number of manual accreditations reveals exactly the opposite of what
this article is suggesting. As seen from the INEC 2015 Presidential Election
March 28, 2015 Declaration of Results the total number of voters accredited
were 31,746,490. The total number of
full-biometric and PVC only biometric accreditation were 23,643,479. The meaning of this is that there were 8,103,011 voters who were accredited
without any form of biometric method at all (i.e. had no contact with the smart
card reader). These are the actual manual accreditations because they just
involved using a pen to tick a voter register. There is no way to actually
prove if this 8,103,011 actually
came to the polling unit or not. This figure should have been the focus of the
above mentioned article since they sought to shed light on manual
accreditation.
Looking at this data
further it is clear that following the argument of the mentioned article the
six of the top ten states that were involved in manual accreditation were won
by the PDP. In addition there were a total of 5,389,648 accredited by voters in states won by the PDP is
equivalent to 66.5% while a total of
2,713,363 voters were accredited in
states won by the APC which translates to 33.5%
of the total manual accreditations. It can be seen that this is clearly
opposite to what the article in question intended to pass across.
Table
showing break down of voter accreditation figures from the 2015 Nigerian
Presidential Election
S/No.
|
STATE
|
Total Accredited Voters
|
FULL BIOMETRIC ACCRD
|
CARD-ONLY ACCRD
|
Full Manual Accreditation
|
1
|
ABIA
|
442,538
|
218,599
|
102,401
|
121,538
|
2
|
ADAMAWA
|
709,993
|
309,513
|
296,733
|
103,747
|
3
|
AKWA IBOM
|
1,074,070
|
234,141
|
288,775
|
551,154
|
4
|
ANAMBRA
|
774,430
|
67,578
|
89,982
|
616,870
|
5
|
BAUCHI
|
1,094,069
|
396,435
|
627,048
|
70,586
|
6
|
BAYELSA
|
384,789
|
42,814
|
143,296
|
198,679
|
7
|
BENUE
|
754,634
|
368,627
|
347,673
|
38,334
|
8
|
BORNO
|
544,759
|
138,629
|
317,933
|
88,197
|
9
|
CROSS RIVER
|
500,577
|
154,687
|
129,381
|
216,509
|
10
|
DELTA
|
1,350,914
|
342,507
|
226,266
|
782,141
|
11
|
EBONYI
|
425,301
|
145,985
|
213,543
|
65,773
|
12
|
EDO
|
599,166
|
306,547
|
237,958
|
54,661
|
13
|
EKITI
|
323,739
|
160,870
|
165,000
|
(2,131)
|
14
|
ENUGU
|
616,112
|
130,814
|
146,730
|
338,568
|
15
|
FCT
|
344,056
|
113,377
|
65,102
|
165,577
|
16
|
GOMBE
|
515,828
|
267,609
|
237,139
|
11,080
|
17
|
IMO
|
801,712
|
84,780
|
151,234
|
565,698
|
18
|
JIGAWA
|
1,153,428
|
382,900
|
744,457
|
26,071
|
19
|
KADUNA
|
1,746,031
|
681,748
|
800,112
|
264,171
|
20
|
KANO
|
2,364,434
|
288,644
|
1,358,537
|
717,253
|
21
|
KATSINA
|
1,578,646
|
398,843
|
1,045,994
|
133,809
|
22
|
KEBBI
|
792,817
|
246,240
|
496,565
|
50,012
|
23
|
KOGI
|
476,839
|
223,189
|
162,763
|
90,887
|
24
|
KWARA
|
489,360
|
109,592
|
302,904
|
76,864
|
25
|
LAGOS
|
1,678,754
|
1,047,338
|
341,151
|
290,265
|
26
|
NASARAWA
|
562,959
|
97,933
|
360,596
|
104,430
|
27
|
NIGER
|
933,607
|
369,157
|
492,870
|
71,580
|
28
|
OGUN
|
594,975
|
299,138
|
239,050
|
56,787
|
29
|
ONDO
|
618,040
|
305,512
|
263,453
|
49,075
|
30
|
OSUN
|
683,169
|
400,809
|
255,460
|
26,900
|
31
|
OYO
|
1,073,849
|
548,007
|
384,316
|
141,526
|
32
|
PLATEAU
|
1,076,833
|
434,695
|
482,788
|
159,350
|
33
|
RIVERS
|
1,643,409
|
152,975
|
158,844
|
1,331,590
|
34
|
SOKOTO
|
988,899
|
175,317
|
588,730
|
224,852
|
35
|
TARABA
|
638,578
|
129,641
|
389,696
|
119,241
|
36
|
YOBE
|
520,127
|
138,692
|
302,965
|
78,470
|
37
|
ZAMFARA
|
875,049
|
193,286
|
578,866
|
102,897
|
31,746,490
|
10,107,168
|
13,536,311
|
8,103,011
|
At this point, it is first
important to note that there is no way to tell if those who did not use
biometric card reader voted for either APC or PDP since voting is anonymous. The
implication is that no one knows whether a person who voted for APC or PDP was
manually or biometrically accredited. Not even the Independent National
Electoral Commission has this sort of information because voting is done by
secret ballot. This is critical because it lays the primary foundation that
there is no quantitative method to determine those who actually ended up voting
for which party.
In addition there were
gaps between those who were accredited (either manually or biometrically) and
those who actually voted. It is not possible to know the percentage of those
who were accredited manually who eventually voted for a particular party neither
is it possible to know the same for those who were biometrically accredited.
This further makes it impossible to accurately say which party if any
benefited more from manual accreditation country wide.
Going further, the fact
that a candidate won a state cannot accurately infer that that means that more manual
accreditations favoured him or her. The problem is that winning a state is a
broad term which could be very misleading. For example there are states where a
candidate won by over 90% of votes while other states with less than 5% of the
vote in the state. So while a candidate may have won in both states it
definitely could not be inferred that he/she benefited more from manual
accreditation since there is no accurate way of distributing the votes cast
amongst those who were accredited manually.
For example PDP won the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) with 157,195 votes as compared
to APC's 146,399 votes. 165,577
voters were accredited manually. It is impossible to know (except perhaps by forensics) how this 165,577 voters were distributed amongst
the votes received by both parties as this information is not available. While former
President Jonathan won the FCT it would be misleading to suggest that he
benefited more from the manual accreditations than the voters who voted for
President Buhari and there is no way to prove this.
Another example is Adamawa
state which was won by President Buhari with 374,701 as compared to President Goodluck Jonathan's 251,664. There were 103,747 manual accreditations and it
would not be possible to apportion these accurately to the APC, PDP or any
other party. As such it cannot be inferred that these manual registrations
benefited one candidate or party over another.
In a state like Kano 717,253 were accredited manually. APC
scored 1,903,999 votes while PDP
garnered 215,779 votes. A total of 2,364,434 were accredited in Kano
altogether. There are 244,656
citizens who did not vote but were accredited in Kano. How many of these were
accredited manually is not known. While it is clear that in a state like Kano a
greater percentage of citizens who were accredited manually also voted for the
APC because of the sheer magnitude of the difference in the votes received by
the APC and the PDP, it is still not possible to say exactly by what extent. This
same scenario goes for Rivers State where there were 1,331,590 voters who were accredited manually. PDP won this state
by receiving 1,487,075 while APC
garnered 69,238 votes. Clearly even
if it is assumed that all the APC votes were by manual accreditation (which is
not possible to prove), there would still be over 1.4 million votes received by the PDP. While the cases of Kano and
Rivers could permit one to make general deductions that a particular party
benefited more in those particular states, the extent is still not known and
cannot be known. Because the majority of states do not have such massive voter
disparity for the APC and PDP it would be inaccurate to make conclusions on
these states and therefore the entire
nation.
The summary is that while
both the APC and PDP benefited from manual accreditations it is not possible
to prove the extent of this conclusively and quantitatively because there is no
data available anywhere to achieve this. Since all voting is anonymous there is
no way of knowing if a manually accredited voter voted for APC, PDP or any
other party. Deducing this with broad comparisons is not scientific, representative
or accurate. This sort of loose and wide scale generalisations should be
avoided as much as possible because Nigeria is in a tense political climate and
every effort should be made not to inflame the situation especially with inconclusive
data.
Table
showing accreditation and votes received by APC and PDP during the 2015
Nigerian Presidential Election
S/No.
|
STATE
|
Total Accredited
Voters
|
FULL BIOMETRIC
ACCRD
|
CARD-ONLY ACCRD
|
TOTAL
|
Total Votes Cast
|
Votes received by
APC
|
Votes received by
PDP
|
1
|
ABIA
|
442,538
|
218,599
|
102,401
|
321,000
|
401,049
|
13,394
|
368,303
|
2
|
ADAMAWA
|
709,993
|
309,513
|
296,733
|
606,246
|
661,210
|
374,701
|
251,664
|
3
|
AKWA IBOM
|
1,074,070
|
234,141
|
288,775
|
522,916
|
1,028,551
|
58,411
|
953,304
|
4
|
ANAMBRA
|
774,430
|
67,578
|
89,982
|
157,560
|
703,409
|
17,926
|
660,762
|
5
|
BAUCHI
|
1,094,069
|
396,435
|
627,048
|
1,023,483
|
1,039,775
|
931,598
|
86,085
|
6
|
BAYELSA
|
384,789
|
42,814
|
143,296
|
186,110
|
371,739
|
5,194
|
361,209
|
7
|
BENUE
|
754,634
|
368,627
|
347,673
|
716,300
|
703,131
|
373,961
|
303,737
|
8
|
BORNO
|
544,759
|
138,629
|
317,933
|
456,562
|
515,008
|
473,543
|
25,640
|
9
|
CROSS RIVER
|
500,577
|
154,687
|
129,381
|
284,068
|
465,906
|
28,368
|
414,863
|
10
|
DELTA
|
1,350,914
|
342,507
|
226,266
|
568,773
|
1,284,848
|
48,910
|
1,211,405
|
11
|
EBONYI
|
425,301
|
145,985
|
213,543
|
359,528
|
393,337
|
19,518
|
323,653
|
12
|
EDO
|
599,166
|
306,547
|
237,958
|
544,505
|
522,785
|
208,469
|
286,869
|
13
|
EKITI
|
323,739
|
160,870
|
165,000
|
325,870
|
309,445
|
120,331
|
176,466
|
14
|
ENUGU
|
616,112
|
130,814
|
146,730
|
277,544
|
585,632
|
14,157
|
553,003
|
15
|
FCT
|
344,056
|
113,377
|
65,102
|
178,479
|
316,015
|
146,399
|
157,195
|
16
|
GOMBE
|
515,828
|
267,609
|
237,139
|
504,748
|
473,444
|
361,245
|
96,873
|
17
|
IMO
|
801,712
|
84,780
|
151,234
|
236,014
|
731,921
|
133,253
|
559,185
|
18
|
JIGAWA
|
1,153,428
|
382,900
|
744,457
|
1,127,357
|
1,071,889
|
885,988
|
142,904
|
19
|
KADUNA
|
1,746,031
|
681,748
|
800,112
|
1,481,860
|
1,650,201
|
1,127,760
|
484,085
|
20
|
KANO
|
2,364,434
|
288,644
|
1,358,537
|
1,647,181
|
2,172,447
|
1,903,999
|
215,779
|
21
|
KATSINA
|
1,578,646
|
398,843
|
1,045,994
|
1,444,837
|
1,481,714
|
1,345,441
|
98,937
|
22
|
KEBBI
|
792,817
|
246,240
|
496,565
|
742,805
|
715,122
|
567,883
|
100,972
|
23
|
KOGI
|
476,839
|
223,189
|
162,763
|
385,952
|
439,287
|
264,851
|
149,987
|
24
|
KWARA
|
489,360
|
109,592
|
302,904
|
412,496
|
461,401
|
302,146
|
132,602
|
25
|
LAGOS
|
1,678,754
|
1,047,338
|
341,151
|
1,388,489
|
1,485,975
|
792,460
|
632,327
|
26
|
NASARAWA
|
562,959
|
97,933
|
360,596
|
458,529
|
521,641
|
236,838
|
273,460
|
27
|
NIGER
|
933,607
|
369,157
|
492,870
|
862,027
|
844,683
|
657,678
|
149,222
|
28
|
OGUN
|
594,975
|
299,138
|
239,050
|
538,188
|
559,613
|
308,290
|
207,950
|
29
|
ONDO
|
618,040
|
305,512
|
263,453
|
568,965
|
582,435
|
299,889
|
251,368
|
30
|
OSUN
|
683,169
|
400,809
|
255,460
|
656,269
|
663,373
|
383,603
|
249,929
|
31
|
OYO
|
1,073,849
|
548,007
|
384,316
|
932,323
|
928,606
|
528,620
|
303,376
|
32
|
PLATEAU
|
1,076,833
|
434,695
|
482,788
|
917,483
|
1,000,692
|
429,140
|
549,615
|
33
|
RIVERS
|
1,643,409
|
152,975
|
158,844
|
311,819
|
1,584,768
|
69,238
|
1,487,075
|
34
|
SOKOTO
|
988,899
|
175,317
|
588,730
|
764,047
|
876,369
|
671,926
|
152,199
|
35
|
TARABA
|
638,578
|
129,641
|
389,696
|
519,337
|
602,716
|
261,326
|
310,800
|
36
|
YOBE
|
520,127
|
138,692
|
302,965
|
441,657
|
491,767
|
446,265
|
25,526
|
37
|
ZAMFARA
|
875,049
|
193,286
|
578,866
|
772,152
|
780,179
|
612,202
|
144,833
|
31,746,490
|
10,107,168
|
13,536,311
|
23,643,479
|
29,422,083
|
15,424,921
|
12,853,162
|
No comments:
Post a Comment