Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 3
The Significance of Vote-Buying in Governance
Vote buying (also referred to as electoral clientelism and patronage politics) occurs when a political party or candidate distributes money or resources to a voter in an upcoming election with the expectation that the voter votes for the actor handing out monetary rewards.[1] Vote buying can take various forms such as a monetary exchange, as well as an exchange for necessary goods or services.[2] This practice is often used to incentivize or persuade voters to turn out to elections and vote in a particular way. Although this practice is illegal in many countries such as the United States, Argentina, Mexico, Kenya, Brazil and Nigeria, its prevalence remains worldwide.
In some parts of the United States[which?] in the mid- and late 19th century, members of competing parties would vie, sometimes openly and other times with much greater secrecy, to buy and sell votes. Voters would be compensated with cash or the covering of one's house/tax payment. To keep the practice of vote buying secret, parties would open fully staffed vote-buying shops.[3] Parties would also hire runners, who would go out into the public and find floating voters and bargain with them to vote for their side.[3]
In England, documentation and stories of vote buying and vote selling are also well known. The most famous episodes of vote buying came in 18th century England when two or more rich aristocrats spent whatever money it took to win. The "Spendthrift election" came in Northampton shire in 1768, when three earls each spent over £100,000 on their favored candidates.[4]
Voters may be given money or other rewards for voting in a particular way, or not voting. In some jurisdictions, the offer or giving of other rewards is referred to as "electoral treating".[5] Electoral treating remains legal in some jurisdictions, such as in the Seneca Nation of Indians.[6] The influence of vote-buying on governance extends far beyond the transactional exchange of money for votes. It delves into the very core of democratic principles, affecting the legitimacy of electoral processes, distorting the representation of citizens' voices, and eroding the foundation of effective governance. Understanding the multifaceted impact of vote-buying is crucial in comprehending its detrimental effects on the integrity of elections and the functioning of democratic systems worldwide. This essay aims to explore the intricate relationship between vote-buying and governance, shedding light on its significance and the imperative need to address this challenge for the sustenance of robust democratic practices.
Vote-buying is one of the factors militating against political development and sustainability of democracy in Nigeria. The country is practicing a “patronage democracy”, a carrot and stick relationship between vote-buyers and vote-sellers in consolidation of commercialization of the polity. The quantum of money in circulation during election barraged political development. Vote-buying is prevalent in Nigeria because an average voter in the country is poor and cannot resist the charming effects of uncontainable electoral bribes in cash or kind, and tantalization of voters with job opportunities purported to exist; and the political elites’ disposition to capitalize on the weak-voters’ unity in vulnerability to exploit the situation to render them politically feeble to control their rights to vote for candidates of their individual choice.
Poverty, unemployment, and illiteracy have been identified by scholars as the major causes of vote- buying. The study argues that electoral fraud is fundamentally a derivative of vote-buying. Vote-buying is the origin of bad governance, facilitator of imposition of wrong and inept group of unsalable persons to find spaces in governance. Insecurity of lives and properties, disunity amongst ethnic groups, secessionists’ agitations from various ethnic associations, the massive blood-letting in all parts of the country, and enormous deficit of infrastructures are the products of vote-buying. The plague generates inept leadership and ineptitude yields poverty, unemployment, and illiteracy. Therefore, emphasis should be located on fierce wrestling against vote-buying and the capacity to institute legal suits against the culprits. CSOs, spNDIted citizens, and other stakeholders should operate beyond rhetorics and take proactive actions against political parties, politicians, or their agents and any delinquent anti-graft agency identified to have been involved in vote-buying or aiding and abetting vote-trading to face the wrath of the law. The “Independent” National Electoral Commission would exhibit proficiency only when it is constitutionally independent; when unbiased appointment of the chairman would be competitive through electoral process.
The utilization of functional card readers in accrediting eligible voters must be sustained to curb electoral irregularities. The precept of ballot secrecy needs functional election legislation to ensure secret voting is not only a right on voters’ part but an absolute obligation that must be observed during election periods. Secret ballot is important to sustain the electoral integrity, and one of the primary devices being applied to restrain vote-buying.
