Ahead of the 2023 general election, one vexed issue has been that of power shift. At the September’s meeting of Northern governors and traditional rulers you hosted in Kaduna, the Forum said no to power shift. What is your take on this?

Some of us have been very public about our support for power shift. I first made my views clear on this matter late in 2019. We did that because we believe that it will help advance and promote national unity. What is not proper is for our colleagues – Governors – in the South to be couching their demands with words like MUST in a process that requires discussions, negotiations and consensus building. What the northern governors did was to condemn that statement for saying there MUST be power shift. We did not condemn or oppose power shift.

What we saw and read in some newspapers was not the reason why we met, and it wasn’t what we said. We were surprised by what we saw from some media outlets.

Of course during our meeting, we talked about what we heard from the Southern Governors that presidency MUST be zoned to the South whether we like it or not. These are the words they used and the way they said it is what annoyed us. That whether the North wants it or not, the presidency must be zoned to the South. What brought the issue of ‘must’ in democracy? Democracy involves sitting down and negotiating. Northerners have supported Southerners. We supported General Olusegun Obasanjo as president. We supported Jonathan and he is also from the South.

Northerners have that spirit of cooperation, but what brought the issue of compulsion into it? There is not anywhere in the Nigerian Constitution where zoning is explicitly stated. But some parties developed the idea of zoning to promote national unity.

Every party has its own rules, but we in APC don’t have anything like zoning. Even PDP that has these rules, it didn’t work during Jonathan. It is unconstitutional to deny any Nigerian to contest for president just because he is from a certain part of Nigeria. This is not part of the Nigerian constitution. If that is the case, what brought the issue of compulsion or saying must when you don’t have any backing for it.

 

So, the Northern Governors are not against power shift to the South but the approach of Southern Governors.

Many of the Northern Governors like me have expressed my opinion that after the tenure of President Buhari, the presidency should be zoned to the South. And we said that because of the relationship we have with the South, not because there is no qualified candidate from the North that wants to be president. Even when I said that many people were not happy and even challenged me why should I even say that. I am not the only person that said such, there are other governors who also expressed the same thing.

Why would the Southern Governors issue that kind of statement? Is it good for us as Northern Governors to come out and issue a statement that we do not agree that any person from the South should contest for president? This is exactly what they did to us. We are also governors like them, why would they not invite us for a meeting and discuss it? This is how it is done. We are practicing democracy. That is the reason we are not happy with the way they made the statement. And that is the reason we came out to condemn it because it is not part of the constitution of Nigeria and that of our parties.

And we also reminded them that in Nigeria, there is no way one can become the president until he has 25% of votes cast from the 24 states, including Abuja, the capital of Nigeria. We have said these things to show that we are practicing the constitution. It is a process where people sit to reconcile and agree on issues.

What annoyed us is where the Southern Governors said power must shift to the South. What brought ‘must’ in this? Meaning that it is under must, whether we like it or not, power must shift to the South.

We did not reject power shift to the South, but they should come and sit down with the political leaders of the North and seek our support.

Kaduna State is the first subnational in Africa to use the Electronic Voting Machine to conduct its local government election. It was first used in 2018 and it was used again on 4^th September 2021. These electronic voting machines take away the ability to write the results. What inspired you to chart this course, despite the costs and the risks?

We are building a democracy. Elections are the basis of democracy. It is the platform that allows citizens to vote for their choice of leader or representative. We believe that the people are truly the masters and the choosers, and it is the duty of government to ensure that the people’s vote counts. We introduced electronic voting in order to promote and safeguard election integrity. We think it is desirable to use electronic voting for all elections in Nigeria and we chose to set an example in the state that God has given us the privilege to lead.

Of course, the initial cost of acquiring the electronic voting machines is high. But that also helps you to avoid the cost of printing ballot papers and buying ballot boxes. You can also upgrade the software in a cost-effective manner.

Apart from the cost, the biggest challenge in adopting electronic voting is the negative consequence of the poor political culture that has been allowed to develop in Nigeria. Many people want to win political contests by all means, whether or not they have the support of the voters. Such political forces fear the outcomes of a free and fair vote. But we must overcome such forces and enthrone free and fair elections as the norm.

Electronic voting has brought national acclaim to you. Many Nigerians have given you credit for this innovation. Has the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) approached the Kaduna State Government to share the experience of your state’s Election Management Body in using these Electronic Voting Machines, for adoption in national elections?

Thank you for your kind words. As I said earlier, there is no reason why electronic voting cannot be adopted nationally. INEC is always welcome to engage with our SIECOM on the matter. We can all learn from each other.

What is your overall verdict on electronic voting having used it twice in Kaduna State? Any lessons?

So far, so good. I am delighted that we have twice proven the effectiveness and efficacy of electronic voting. We have shown that it is doable. The elections have also reminded politicians that the people matter, that their votes count and that the election results must reflect the actual votes cast.

We can still improve the technology by embedding the voter’s register for each polling unit into the electronic voting machine that will be deployed there.

But all that will await the final report from SIECOM and their review of what went well and what needs further improvement. We have a duty and a desire to strive to make better what we have started.

What is the attitude of your government to the results of the local government elections?

We commend the people of Kaduna State for peacefully exercising their democratic rights. We thank them most profoundly for reposing their trust in trust and voting for the APC. Our party is the big winner in this election. On all counts. We have reaffirmed our democratic credentials and commitment to election integrity. We have proven that you can win elections by relying on the people’s vote rather than resorting to writing results. We have won an overwhelming majority of the local government areas that have been declared. We did not win everywhere, but we remain the majority party. The evidence is clear that the APC remains the dominant party in Kaduna State. After six years in office, during which we have taken bold and difficult decisions, we still retain the confidence of the people of Kaduna State.