Electronic Voting in Nigerian Parliament

The leadership of the National Assembly is committed to #OpenNASS, we must commend them for that, and it takes courage and true leadership to do that. At this juncture, it is important to ask, what does #OpenNASS mean to Nigerians? What aspect of the National Assembly does #OpenNASS cover? Should we advocate #OpenNASS or #OpenLegislature? Going through trends it is easy to note that #OpenNASS means pay cut and transparency in the spending of the National Assembly to a lot people. 

                                          

At EOTM, we believe #OpenNASS should also translate to accountability and transparency on how our legislators vote on key issues and bills. In the spirit of #OpenNASS, constituents should have unhindered access to how their representatives represent them. I personally will like to know how my Senator or member voted on PIB bill, Sexual Offences bill, and an array of other bills. 

Research has shown that electronic voting in parliament is very effective in saving time, recording votes and publishing votes. In order to give you the opportunity to form your own opinions, allow me to explain the three modes of voting in the National Assembly.

According to Rule 72 of the Senate Standing Order, the National Assembly recognizes three modes of voting namely:

1.      voice votes

2.      signing of register in a division

3.      Through electronic device installed in the Senate

(Note: The same rule applies in the House of Representatives).

These modes of voting can be further sub-divided into two groups which are the unrecorded votes and recorded votes. Voice votes falls into the unrecorded category, while division and electronic voting is classified under the later.

VOICE VOTES:

Rule 71(3)(4) states that: 

When the question has been put by the President of the Senate or the Chairman at the conclusion of the debate the votes shall be taken by voices ayes and noes and the result shall be declared by the President of the Senate or Chairman. The result shall be declared by the President or Chairman stating "I think the ayes have it" or "I think the noes have it has the case may be.

The first shortfall of voice vote is the inability to record the votes. Therefore this hinders the electorate from knowing how their representatives vote. This has robbed the citizenry the opportunity of putting on record attitudes of legislators towards certain bills or legislation. It is however difficult for constituents to ascertain if their interests is reflected by their representatives.

Secondly, declaring voice vote results is based on the opinion/discretion of the Presiding Officer. We have experienced cases where the “ayes clearly have it” but the Presiding Officer declares that the “nays have it”. Should bills or motions affecting the general public be reduced to what the Senate President or Speaker thinks?

Lastly, this type of voting has the potential to influence or lead to confrontation on the floor of the Assembly. It has been observed that voice vote has led to the most brutal confrontations in the history of the National Assembly. The last was a staged walk out following the perceived partial ruling of the Presiding Officer (declaring "nays" when "ayes" clearly have it). 

DIVISION:

Division occurs when Senator/Member challenges the opinion of the Presiding Officer. If s/he is not satisfied with the rulings from the Chair, s/he can claim a division. This process involves legislators voting "ayes" physically moving to one side of the chamber and the "nays" moving to the other side. This is followed by the Clerk calling each legislators name, asking each separately on how they desire to vote and records the vote accordingly. In the year 2000, President of the Senate Chuba Okadigbo was impeached through a division vote. The records of Senators who voted for/against the impeachment can be found in the archives of votes and proceedings in the National Assembly because it was done through division which is always a recorded vote.

The major shortcoming of this voting type is time management. Imagine a House voting on more than one bill a day, adopting division voting for all the bills would be time consuming and cumbersome. Though it gives the electorate more information on representative's vote but it is time consuming. Legislators may be reluctant to claim this type of voting because of the time management issue.

ELECTRONIC VOTING:

Nigerian parliament is one of the parliaments across the globe equipped with modern day electronic voting equipment. In theory, National Assembly is classified as using electronic voting device, but such classification is not obtainable in practice. It is obvious that the electronic voting solves the challenges posed by voice votes and division. It reduces the influence of the Presiding Officer in the bill/motion voting process; it reduces confrontations, saves time and record votes. The electronic voting system is rarely used in the Assembly; it has been observed that electronic voting is only deployed when voting on Constitution review bills.

The following parliaments; Polish Sejm, Sudan National Assembly, South African Parliament, Mexican Parliament, Indian Rajya Sabha, European Parliament, Norwegian Parliament, Czech Parliament, Hungarian Parliament, National Assembly Council of Belarus, Japan HC, Estonian Rii, Israel Knesset and a host of others have adopted and listed the substantial benefits of the electronic voting as time saving (10 - 20 seconds to vote and announce results) immediate publishing of votes (in some cases online).

Why is the National Assembly not using the installed electronic voting device? Why has the National Assembly restricted electronic voting to Constitution review process? 

I implore you to join the conversation online and offline asking the right questions as to what will make the 8^th Assembly work perfectly for the much expected change every citizen desires.

As we clamor for #OpenNASS, Wouldn’t you rather know how your Representatives vote as well?

#SupportNASSeVoting