<\/p>\n
Addressing a press conference in Abuja on Monday on the preliminary report
\non the March 9 governorship election, the group condemned the heavy
\nmilitary presence in some parts of the country leading to disruption of
\nthe electoral processes.<\/p>\n
The group also recommended the creation of appropriate institutions to
\noversee political parties and prosecute electoral offences.<\/p>\n
SEE FULL TEXT OF THE REPORT:<\/p>\n
Preliminary Statement of the Joint NDI\/IRI International Observation
\nMission to Nigeria\u2019s March 9 Gubernatorial and State House of Assembly
\nElections<\/p>\n
March 11, 2019 Abuja, Nigeria<\/p>\n
I. OVERVIEW<\/p>\n
This preliminary statement is offered by the international observation
\nmission of the International Republican Institute (IRI) and the National
\nDemocratic Institute (NDI) to Nigeria\u2019s March 9, 2019 gubernatorial and
\nstate House of Assembly elections. The 20-person mission, with members
\nfrom 11 countries, was co-led by Dr. Christopher Fomunyoh, Senior
\nAssociate and Regional Director for Central and West Africa (NDI), and
\nJohn Tomaszewski, Regional Director for Africa (IRI). The mission visited
\nNigeria from March 4 \u2013 11, 2019, and deployed 10 observer teams to 10
\nstates covering all six geo-political zones and the Federal Capital
\nTerritory (FCT). The IRI\/NDI deployment for the March 9 elections
\nunderscores the significance of the state level polls for the
\nconsolidation of democracy in Nigeria.<\/p>\n
Through this statement, NDI and IRI seek to reflect the international
\ncommunity\u2019s interest in and support for democratic electoral processes in
\nNigeria; provide an accurate and impartial report on the electoral process
\nto date; and offer recommendations to consolidate democratic gains and
\nimprove future elections. The mission builds on the findings of three
\njoint IRI\/NDI pre-election assessments conducted in May, September and
\nDecember 2018; an observation mission deployed for the February 23
\nnational elections; reports submitted by members of the NDI\/IRI mission
\nobserving the March 9 state-level polls; and additional reports prepared
\nby thematic technical experts and in-country staff.<\/p>\n
The mission conducted its activities in accordance with Nigerian law and
\nthe Declaration of Principles for International Election Observation. The
\nmission collaborated closely with the European Union (EU) observation
\nmission and with Nigerian citizen observer groups. The IRI\/NDI mission is
\ngrateful for the hospitality and cooperation it received from all
\nNigerians with whom it met, especially voters, government officials, the
\nChairman and members of the Independent National Election Commission
\n(INEC) and polling officials, party members and candidates, citizen
\nelection observers, civic activists and members of the National Peace
\nCommittee (NPC).<\/p>\n
Summary of Findings<\/p>\n
Many Nigerians continue to underscore the particular significance of the
\nMarch 9 state level elections. Under Nigeria\u2019s federal system, the 36
\nstates and FCT are the pillars of the country’s democratic architecture
\nwhere the decisions that impact citizens\u2019 everyday lives are made.
\nMoreover, it is easier for citizens to hold to account elected leaders at
\nthe state level than those at the federal level, because their actions
\naffect local services more directly. While a marked improvement was seen
\nin the administration of the March 9 state-level elections compared to
\nFebruary 23, and the electoral environment was generally calm in most
\nparts of the country, the elections our delegation observed were marred by
\nirregularities, instances of intimidation, vote-buying and violent acts
\nduring the voting, counting, and collation processes in some places.
\nIncidents of violence and disruption to the balloting process were
\nobserved in Lagos, Benue, Rivers, and Nasarawa states. The delegation was
\ninformed of the loss of life as a result of election-day violence. The
\nmission deplores these losses and expresses its deepest condolences to the
\nbereaved and to the Nigerian people. These actions and the impunity with
\nwhich some electoral actors conducted themselves, including some polling
\nagents and members of the military, undermine citizen confidence in
\nelections and threaten the legitimacy of Nigeria\u2019s democracy.<\/p>\n
In the days leading up to the March 9 elections, many states still
\ngrappled with inconclusive candidate selection processes, uncertainty
\nabout the parties to appear on the ballot and pending litigation on these
\nmatters. The confusion generated by this uncertainty hampered effective
\ncampaigning, and hence hindered voters\u2019 ability to make informed choices
\non election day. For the most part, political parties were unable to
\nresolve disputes emanating from party primaries and candidate selection
\nprocesses through internal mechanisms. As a result, many aggrieved
\nindividuals petitioned courts of law for redress, overtaxing INEC and the
\ncountry\u2019s legal system.<\/p>\n
Moreover, the intense focus on federal campaigns for the presidency and
\nNational Assembly so close to the state-level polls overshadowed local
\ncampaigns and may have also undermined the mobilization of voters for the
\nMarch 9 elections. There were very few women in winning positions on the
\ntickets fielded by major political parties for the gubernatorial and state
\nHouse of Assembly polls. Despite being Africa\u2019s largest democracy, Nigeria
\nhas the lowest representation of women in national legislative office of
\nany country on the continent, and this representation will likely fall
\nbelow five percent following the February 23 National Assembly vote. This
\nis not a record to be proud of. Finally, many Nigerians expressed deep
\nconcerns about the militarization of the election process.<\/p>\n
The NDI\/IRI mission stresses that this statement is preliminary in nature;
\nthe collation and announcement of final results has not concluded, and IRI
\nand NDI will continue to watch the remaining phases of the electoral
\nprocess. The mission recognizes that, ultimately, it is the people of
\nNigeria who will determine the credibility of these elections. As the 2019
\nelectoral cycle comes to a close, NDI and IRI call on all electoral
\nstakeholders in the immediate post-election period to take stock of and
\nbuild consensus on priority electoral reforms in order to rebuild popular
\nconfidence in advance of future elections.<\/p>\n
I. The Context Leading Up to State-Level Elections<\/p>\n
On March 9, gubernatorial races were held in 29 states and state House of
\nAssembly elections were held in all 36 states. Area council elections
\noccurred in FCT. In 19 states, incumbent governors sought reelection.
\nHeading into the March 9 polls, the All Progressives Congress (APC)
\ncontrolled the governorship and state House of Assembly in 22 states,
\nwhile the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) controlled 13 states, and the All
\nProgressives Grand Alliance (APGA) one. Supplementary elections were also
\norganized on March 9 for seven Senate and 25 House of Representatives
\nseats in 14 states where polls were suspended on February 23 due to
\nviolence or other disruptions.<\/p>\n
The gubernatorial, state House of Assembly, and supplementary elections
\nwere conducted in a context of lingering tensions in the immediate
\naftermath of the February 23 national-level polls. Moreover, numerous
\nelectoral disputes from last year\u2019s party primaries are still being
\nlitigated in the courts, creating uncertainty about the status of
\nindividual candidates in certain gubernatorial and state House of Assembly
\nraces.<\/p>\n
Significance of state-level elections: Gubernatorial elections are a
\nbetter indicator of the strength of respective political parties within
\neach locality as opposed to elections for offices at the federal level.
\nGovernors manage state budgets and play an important role in mobilizing
\ngrassroots support. Similarly, state Houses of Assembly exercise crucial
\noversight authority over state executives and legislate on local concerns.<\/p>\n
State-level elections are fiercely contested, as various groups compete
\nfor access to public office and resources, and engage patronage networks
\nat the local level. Intra-state politics can exacerbate pre-existing
\nethnic and religious tensions. The delegation heard concerns that in
\nstates such as Lagos and Kaduna, ethnic or religious divisions create
\nfault lines that could become drivers of election-related violence.<\/p>\n
Inconclusive candidate selection processes: The absence of internal party
\ndemocracy and the lack of effective mechanisms for resolving intra-party
\ndisputes contributed to highly contentious party primaries in 2018 which
\nresulted in more than 600 pending court cases, some of them to resolve
\ncandidacies for state-level offices. As one respected Nigerian commented,
\n\u201cparties and candidates are relying on the court system to resolve
\nproblems caused by their own opaque candidate selection processes.\u201d In the
\nlead-up to the gubernatorial elections, court rulings on the eligibility
\nof parties and candidates in several states were issued within days of the
\npolls. Last-minute legal proceedings and uncertainty about which parties
\nwould be on the ballot created confusion among voters and may have
\nhindered effective campaigning by parties and candidates. These legal
\nwrangling also posed significant challenges in election planning for INEC
\nand overburdened the legal system.<\/p>\n
INEC Communication: After the one-week postponement of the presidential
\nand National Assembly polls on February 16, INEC increased public outreach
\nand communications, including through regular press briefings. However,
\nwhile some information sharing continued at the state-level through
\nResident Election Commissioners (RECs), the frequency of communication
\nfrom INEC headquarters declined following the national elections. Only on
\nMarch 9 the day of the elections did INEC publicize the names of the
\nwinners of the Senate and House of Representative elections and the list
\nof constituencies and polling units where supplementary elections were to
\nhold. Additionally, INEC has yet to release detailed results from the
\nnational polls, has not responded publicly to questions about the
\ndiscrepancy in the number of registered voters announced during the
\ncollation process, nor explained the high number of cancelled votes in the
\nFebruary 23 polls.<\/p>\n
Lack of Women\u2019s Representation: The percentage of women candidates running
\nfor governor and deputy governor increased slightly this year from 6 and
\n17 percent respectively in 2015 to 8 and 26 percent. However, the two
\nmajor parties did not field any women candidates for governor.
\nAdditionally, of the 276 women running for deputy governor, only five were
\ncandidates from APC or PDP. Similarly, of the nearly 1,900 women running
\nfor state House of Assembly seats, only 75 are from APC or PDP. As was the
\ncase for the February 23 national elections, the vast majority of women
\ncandidates for state-level elections ran on the tickets of newly created
\nparties, with little prospect of winning elected office.<\/p>\n
Thus far, the Nigerian government has not applied the 35 percent
\naffirmative action principle included in the 2006 National Gender Policy,
\nand the National Assembly has repeatedly missed opportunities to adopt
\nlegislation that would support greater participation of women in politics.
\nA Gender and Equal Opportunities Bill has been before the National
\nAssembly since 2010.<\/p>\n
Election-related Insecurity: In the lead-up to the March 9 polls,
\nrepresentatives of the two major parties accused each other of planning to
\ndisrupt the electoral process in various states, and the mission received
\nreports of a spike in violent confrontations between APC and PDP
\nsupporters. In Akwa Ibom, an alleged arson at the INEC office in Ibesikpo
\nAsutan LGA on March 8 destroyed smart card readers, and INEC had to
\nmobilize nearly 200 replacements from other states within 24 hours. In
\nthis context, the INEC chairman felt compelled to state publicly that the
\ncommission would not declare any winners in cases of electoral
\nmalpractice, including cases in which INEC officials may be forced under
\nduress to declare a winner, as happened in Benue and Imo states during the
\nFebruary 23 national polls. The killing of some INEC staff and citizens as
\na result of the Feb. 23 and Mar. 9 elections, as well as incidents of rape
\nand other acts of sexual violence against women, are abhorrent acts that
\nmerit serious investigation with the aim of ensuring that perpetrators are
\nbrought to justice. The mission extends its deepest condolences to the
\nvictims and families.<\/p>\n
Positive initiatives in the lead up to the March 9 elections: The mission
\nnoted several efforts by political leaders to decrease tensions and foster
\nthe conduct of credible polls. Three days before election day, President
\nBuhari issued a statement stressing the importance of peaceful state-level
\nelections, and his main challenger in the presidential race, former Vice
\nPresident Atiku Abubakar, used social media to call on PDP supporters to
\ncome out in large numbers and vote peacefully on March 9. In a positive
\nstep that defused tensions during a public demonstration staged by PDP at
\nINEC headquarters to voice concerns over the role played by some security
\nagencies during the national elections, INEC commissioners invited PDP
\nleaders into the building and immediately engaged in discussions to
\naddress their concerns.<\/p>\n
Gubernatorial candidates or their parties in 25 states signed peace
\naccords, committing candidates and their supporters to avoid behavior that
\nwould endanger the peaceful conduct of the elections. This innovation was
\nan effort to replicate, at the state level, the 2019 Abuja Accord
\nfacilitated by the NPC and signed by all presidential candidates at a
\npublic ceremony on February 13. Some of the state level agreements were
\nfacilitated by the NPC, and others by INEC and the Inter-Agency
\nConsultative Committee on Elections (ICCES).<\/p>\n
Well-respected Nigerian civil society organizations such as CLEEN
\nFoundation, Situation Room, and YIAGA Africa, maintained efforts at
\nmonitoring the elections to support a credible electoral process. The
\nCentre for Democracy and Development (CDD) supported balanced and
\nprofessional media reporting on the electoral process, in an effort to
\ncurb disinformation and hate speech. Other groups, such as the Youngstars
\nDevelopment Initiative (YDI), intensified calls for peaceful citizen
\nengagement in the elections. There were also instances of grassroots
\ngroups, such as Imo Youth, calling for violence-free polls and good
\ngovernance.<\/p>\n
III. ELECTION DAY OBSERVATIONS<\/p>\n
Participation: Overall, voter participation in the polling units observed
\nby the NDI\/IRI mission was low. Women and youth were well-represented as
\npolling officials, party agents and observers, with a significant number
\nof women serving as presiding officers in polling units. In addition,
\nobservers found that voting rights for internally displaced persons (IDPs)
\nwere generally respected, with IDPs in Benue and Adamawa permitted to vote
\nin their camps. However, IRI\/NDI observers noted significant impediments
\nto voting for persons with disabilities and the elderly, as many polling
\nunits were not physically accessible to these voters.<\/p>\n
Set-up and Opening: Most polling units that NDI\/IRI observed opened on
\ntime and received all essential materials prior to opening. However, in
\nparts of Lagos, Nasarawa and Kaduna states, observers noted serious delays
\nin the opening of some polling units. Such delays were generally due to
\nthe late arrival of INEC staff or party agents and the late distribution
\nof materials from the Registration Area Centers (RACs). In Ikeja LGA in
\nLagos, many polling units opened late, some as late as 11:00 am, due to a
\nstrike by polling officials demanding backpay for their services on
\nFebruary 23. These delayed openings created tension and disorder.<\/p>\n
Voting: For the most part, voting was calm and polling officials performed
\ntheir duties according to procedure. Overall, observers reported few
\ninstances of overcrowding; however, this may be due to low voter turnout
\nin many states. In general, accreditation and voting procedures were
\nfollowed according to INEC guidelines. Polling officials verified
\npermanent voter cards (PVCS) using the smart card readers; where
\nfingerprints could not be authenticated, procedures for manual
\naccreditation were generally followed and voter details were checked
\nagainst the register. Where IRI\/NDI observed, there was generally gender
\nbalance among INEC and ad hoc election officials.<\/p>\n
NDI\/IRI observers reported that smart card readers were functioning in
\nmost polling units. In the few instances where they malfunctioned, the
\nproblem was immediately reported, and voting was suspended until the smart
\ncard reader was replaced. In some polling units in Lagos and Nasarawa
\nstates, the delay caused by malfunctioning smart card readers raised
\ntension among voters who had been waiting in line for long periods.<\/p>\n
As was also noted by IRI\/NDI observers during the February 23 polls, the
\nsecrecy of the ballot was not uniformly protected in polling units
\nobserved. Insufficient physical space within some polling units meant
\ncitizens marked and cast their ballots in very close proximity to party
\nagents, polling and security officials, and the general public. Some
\npolling units in Lagos State did not have voting cubicles and did not
\nprovide adequate space to protect voter privacy. Moreover, much like the
\nFebruary 23 elections, instances of assisted voting exceeded the mandate
\nset out in INEC\u2019s regulations.<\/p>\n
Closing: In the majority of polling units where NDI\/IRI observed, the
\natmosphere at closing and counting remained calm and orderly with polling
\nofficials mostly following procedures outlined in INEC guidelines.
\nHowever, in some locations the atmosphere was tense and procedures were
\nnot followed. In particular, observers in Rivers reported party agents
\nwere not given an opportunity to sign the results form; in Akwa Ibom,
\nparty loyalists attempted to disrupt the counting process; in Imo, polling
\nofficials were uninformed about the procedures to handle unused ballots;
\nand in Nasarawa, polling officials were not provided the means to
\ntransport election materials to the collation center, hindering the
\nsecurity of sensitive materials. Of most concern, IRI\/NDI observers
\nwitnessed a melee in a Benue polling unit when, during the count,
\naggrieved voters looking to receive cash for their vote violently
\nconfronted party agents. INEC officials in this polling unit were forced
\nto stop counting ballots and relocate to the collation center to complete
\nthe process.<\/p>\n
Collation: The delegation heard concerns expressed by reputable citizen
\nobserver groups about serious irregularities and violence at collation
\ncenters in many parts of the country. These groups also reported that
\nobservers and party agents were chased away or barred from the collation
\ncenters. IRI\/NDI observers similarly noted issues at collation centers in
\nAdamawa, Benue, Lagos, Nasarawa, and in Rivers state where observers saw
\nINEC officials flee a collation center due to a rumored threat of an
\nattack.<\/p>\n
Electoral Offences and Violence: Observers reported cases of violence and
\nintimidation in Imo, Adamawa, and Akwa Ibom states. In this last state,
\nfrustrations rose between party agents and among voters over overt
\ncampaigning in the polling unit. NDI\/IRI observers also reported in Benue
\nthat four polling officials were kidnapped as they travelled to the
\ncollation center and that voting had to be rescheduled in at least three
\nlocations where violence occurred. The civil society coalition Situation
\nRoom reported a total of seven deaths by midday, in addition to several
\nkidnappings in Rivers state. These incidents and the fire in Akwa Ibom
\nthat destroyed smart card readers and voter registers for one LGA on March
\n8 reinforce the impression of concerted attempts to disrupt the election
\nprocess in certain localities.<\/p>\n
Overt vote buying in the form of distribution of cash and food inside or
\nnear polling units was observed in Akwa Ibom, Benue, PCT, and Imo.
\nNotably, open voting in polling units in Akwa Ibom allowed party agents to
\nsee marked ballots and to direct voters to a location near the polling
\nunit to receive payments. The REC for Benue confirmed an incident whereby
\nlarge bags of cash were intercepted by the Economic and Financial Crimes
\nCommission (EFCC). The EFCC officials were subsequently attacked by party
\nrepresentatives.<\/p>\n
Security services and the military: Police and unarmed security officials,
\nfor the most part, conducted themselves with restraint and professionalism
\nin polling units where NDI\/IRI observed. However, our observers reported a
\nheavy military presence in some areas, including near polling units, which
\nheightened tensions and raised fears of imminent military intervention in
\nthe election process. Media and credible observer groups also reported
\nthat the military disrupted the polls in some areas, including in Rivers
\nstate where soldiers deployed heavily around INEC\u2019s office.<\/p>\n
Political party agents: As with the presidential and National Assembly
\nelections, the over-involvement of party agents was widespread in polling
\nunits observed, including instances in Nasarawa and Benue states where
\nparty agents accompanied voters to the voting cubicles\u00a0 and helped them
\nmark and cast their ballots, in violation of procedure. Finally, the poor
\naccreditation and training of party agents remains a major hindrance to an
\norderly and free voting process. \u2018<\/p>\n
IV. RECOMMENDATIONS<\/p>\n
The delegation heard from many Nigerians that, in comparing the conduct of
\nthe 2019 polls to those of 2015, they are disappointed with the lack of
\nprogress in election administration and with the performance of political
\nparties in elections. Nigerian democrats recognize that this election
\ncycle coincides with the 20th anniversary of the country\u2019s transition to
\ncivilian democratic rule. We therefore urge a national conversation on
\nprogress made and vulnerabilities that must be overcome to further
\nstrengthen the credibility of electoral processes and safeguard the
\ncountry\u2019s democracy. In the spirit of international cooperation, the
\nIRI\/NDI mission offers the following recommendations:<\/p>\n
To the Executive Branch of Government: Expedite the adoption of
\ncomprehensive electoral reforms in order to lay the groundwork for an
\nimproved electoral framework. Implement fully and expeditiously the
\nrecommendations of Nigerian-led reform initiatives such as the reports
\nfrom the Uwais Commission (2008) and the Nnamani Committee (2017), and
\ncreate appropriate institutions to oversee political parties and prosecute
\nelectoral offences, responsibilities that currently impede INEC\u2019s focus on
\nelection administration.<\/p>\n
Adopt and apply measures to achieve the 35 percent affirmative action for
\nwomen in both elective and appointive posts as envisioned in the 2006
\nNational Gender Policy. Investigate the actions of the military and hold
\naccountable those who violated the electoral and other laws.<\/p>\n
To the National Assembly:<\/p>\n
Undertake and pass amendments to the election law that address the
\nchallenges and lessons learned from the 2019 electoral cycle, and do so
\nearly enough to allow these changes to be implemented before the next
\nround of state or national elections.<\/p>\n
Prioritize legislation that would promote women\u2019s leadership and political
\nparticipation, notably by the adoption of the Gender and Equal
\nOpportunities Bill.<\/p>\n
To INEC:<\/p>\n
Publish complete and detailed state level results as well as national
\nresults in a timely manner.<\/p>\n
Conduct a comprehensive review of the conduct of the 2019 polls that
\ninvolves a full spectrum of election stakeholders.<\/p>\n
Review the recommendations from credible domestic and international
\nobserver groups to improve the electoral framework and conduct of
\nelections.<\/p>\n
Enhance communications and data management between the state and national
\nlevels to ensure that information about election processes and results are
\nshared with the public in a timely and transparent manner.<\/p>\n
Reconsider the order and timing of general elections in Nigeria to ensure
\nsufficient time for election preparations and to promote voter
\nparticipation and engagement at both the grassroots and national levels.<\/p>\n
Fully empower presiding officers to exercise their authority to act on
\nelection offenses when they occur.<\/p>\n
To political parties and candidates:<\/p>\n
As stated in NDI\/IRI\u2019s February 25 statement, there is an urgent need to
\nstrengthen mechanisms for internal democracy, especially to encourage
\nleadership of women and youth.<\/p>\n
Develop internal mechanisms for effective resolution of intra-party disputes.<\/p>\n
Work across party lines to identify common priorities and support
\nelectoral reform. Abandon electoral practices such as voter intimidation,
\nvote buying, and other disruptions of the election process that undermine
\ncitizen confidence in elections and democratic governance.<\/p>\n
Develop state-level platforms and policy positions that take into
\nconsideration localized priority issues upon which voters can base their
\nchoices.<\/p>\n
Strengthen relationships between party structures and elected
\nrepresentatives in the National Assembly and at the state level to support
\nparties\u2019 reform agendas and ensure campaign promises are met in ways that
\nimprove the well-being of citizens.<\/p>\n
To civil society:<\/p>\n
Convene national and state-level multi-stakeholder dialogues to draw
\nlessons from the 2019 election process and galvanize broad-based public
\nsupport for electoral reform.<\/p>\n
Drawing upon lessons learned from the #NotTooYoungToRun campaign and the
\npassage of the Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities
\n(Prohibition) Act, create a broad-based coalition and aggressively
\nchampion coordinated advocacy efforts to increase the political
\nparticipation of women. Enhance efforts to channel citizen priorities at
\nthe state and local level to elected representatives and state-level party
\nstructures in an effort to promote more responsive and accountable
\ngovernance.<\/p>\n
To security agencies:<\/p>\n
Work with INEC to enforce the electoral law by investigating and
\nprosecuting perpetrators of election-related criminal acts.<\/p>\n
Investigate and sanction security personnel who violate the rules of
\nengagement on election day.<\/p>\n
Most importantly, we call on the Nigerian people to claim, protect, and
\ndefend their democracy and respect the rights of fellow citizens to
\nparticipate peacefully in the political process.<\/p>\n
Meaningful democratic progress can only be achieved if Nigerians continue
\nto champion their civic duties and responsibilities.<\/p>\n
V. About the Mission<\/p>\n
Both IRI and NDI have deployed international election observation missions
\nto all general elections in Nigeria since the 1999 transition from
\nmilitary to civilian democratic rule. NDI and IRI are nonpartisan,
\nnongovernmental organizations that support and strengthen democratic
\ninstitutions and practices worldwide. The Institutes have observed
\ncollectively more than 200 elections in more than 50 countries over the
\nlast 30 years.<\/p>\n
The joint IRI\/NDI observation mission for the March 9 elections built upon
\nthree NDI\/IRI preelection assessment missions conducted in July, September
\nand December 2018, and an election day observation mission deployed for
\nthe February 23 national polls. The IRI\/NDI mission conducted its
\nactivities in accordance with the Declaration of Principles for
\nInternational Election Observation, which was launched in 2005 at the
\nUnited Nations, and the laws of Nigeria. It also considered international
\nand regional electoral standards, including the African Union (AU) African
\nCharter on Democracy, Elections and Governance, as well as the Economic
\nCommunity of West African States (ECOWAS) Protocol on Democracy and Good
\nGovernance.<\/p>\n
The delegation\u2019s work was funded by the United States Agency for
\nInternational Development (USAID).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
joint report by the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and International Republican Institute (IRI) has been released on the just-concluded governorship and house of assembly elections, raising concerns over heavy…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":27879,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[17],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-65433","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-exclusive"],"yoast_head":"\n