Translate or Listen
Accessibility Settings:
Additional translations and tools are available here.

Tools & Resources

Filter by
Type
Region / Country
Issues / Topics
Capabilities
Global Centers
Programs & Initiatives
Author
Displayed results have no related Authors.
Expert
Publication date
Language
Type
Region / Country
Issues / Topics
Capabilities
Global Centers
Programs & Initiatives
Author
Displayed results have no related Authors.
Expert
Publication date
Language
Showing 81 - 90 of 127 results
Clear All Filters
Publication
Report/Paper

Promoting Electoral Access for Citizens with Disabilities: Considerations for Nigeria, INEC-Civil Society Forum Seminar on Agenda for Electoral Reform, 27-28 November 2003, Abuja, Nigeria

The right to participate in and stand for election is a fundamental human right. According to Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: “Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity, without any of the distinctions mentioned in Article 2 and without unreasonable restrictions: (a) To take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives’ (b) To vote and be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors; (c) To have access, on general terms of equality, to public service in his country.” The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights sets an international standard for the conduct of the elections and the right of participation in that process. In reviewing the Constitutional and legal framework of Nigeria’s electoral process, it is important to ensure that this framework meets international standards, while taking into account the nation’s experience and political and social environment. The right of participation of “every citizen” is one that must be guaranteed by law and by the way the electoral process is conducted. In Nigeria, citizens with disabilities face legal as well as practical barriers to equal participation in the electoral process. However, this electoral review affords the opportunity to ensure that the rights of citizens with disabilities are protected by law and by practice. There is no reliable data on how many of Nigeria’s approximately 120 million citizens live with some sort of physical or mental disability. Nigerian census officials last submitted statistics on disability to the United Nations over 12 years ago, estimating at that time that .5 percent of the population was disabled. This figure is not comparable to the international norm and is a severe under-estimate. In the United States, at least 6% of population has some form of obvious disability – is blind or visually impaired; deaf; a wheelchair user or has an intellectual disability. However, with Nigeria’s incidence of polio, nutritional problems and difficulties with access to healthcare, the percentage of Nigerians with obvious disabilities is likely to be higher – perhaps 10% or more. With an estimated population of 120 million, that would be more than 12 million citizens with disabilities – half of whom are of voting age, at least some 6 million people. This, of course, does not take into account persons with hidden or even undiagnosed disabilities, such as learning disabilities, diabetes, epilepsy, heart disease, etc. Section 17(2) of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution states that “every citizen shall have equality of rights, obligations and opportunities before law.” Do the Constitutional and legal provisions governing the conduct of elections guarantee this right for those Nigerian citizens with disabilities? Are Nigerians with disabilities able to equally participate in and stand for election?
November 26, 2003
Publication
Report/Paper

Reforming Critical Operational Strategies: INEC Post-Election Seminar, "2003 General Elections: The Lessons and the Way Forward" 28-30 July 2003

Constitutional provisions, electoral legislation, regulations and the policies and the administrative framework of the electoral management body all govern the means by which elections are conducted. Providing an opportunity for all eligible voters to choose their government representatives, through operations that are cost-effective, credible and secure is a major challenge for election management bodies. In reviewing the operational strategies of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) of Nigeria in its conduct of the 2003 federal and state elections, it is necessary to examine the major areas of its operational approach. In any electoral environment, there are similar key issues for which effective solutions have to be found if election operations are to promote public confidence in the integrity and professionalism of electoral management, and acceptance of election results. Some questions to ask in conducting this review are: 1. What are the most suitable arrangements for voter registration and for voting? 2. What are the ways to ensure that registration centres and polling stations are run by trained and professional staff? 3. What materials can be used to ensure the credibility of the process? 4. What are the logistics strategies, to ensure the necessary materials are available and that the operations run efficiently? INEC’s operational strategies, within the legislative and administrative framework, dictate how the elections are conducted, and whether their outcome will be accepted by the participants. If the operational strategies are successful, all eligible voters have the opportunity to participate fully in the process; registration centres and polling stations open on time and the periods of operations are respected; materials are adequately supplied and properly used; all necessary registration and election staff are present and conduct their duties according to the law and regulations; and the election results are compiled in a transparent manner, announced in a timely fashion and accepted, leading to the inauguration of the newly-elected officials. Shortcomings in the operational strategies lessen the credibility of the electoral process and in confidence of the electoral management body, paving the way for future difficulties with regard to respect for the conduct of elections and the democratic process as a whole.
July 27, 2003