Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
02ABUJA3033
2002-11-06 08:31:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Abuja
Cable title:  

NIGERIA: FRIENDS OF NIGERIA MEET ON INEC

Tags:  PGOV PREL KDEM NI 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L ABUJA 003033 

SIPDIS


LONDON FOR CGURNEY: PLEASE PASS TO A/S KANSTEINER AND AMB.
JETER


E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/20/2012
TAGS: PGOV PREL KDEM NI
SUBJECT: NIGERIA: FRIENDS OF NIGERIA MEET ON INEC
PERFORMANCE


REF: ABUJA 2831


Classified by Ambassador Howard F. Jeter. Reasons: 1.5 (B &
D).


C O N F I D E N T I A L ABUJA 003033

SIPDIS


LONDON FOR CGURNEY: PLEASE PASS TO A/S KANSTEINER AND AMB.
JETER


E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/20/2012
TAGS: PGOV PREL KDEM NI
SUBJECT: NIGERIA: FRIENDS OF NIGERIA MEET ON INEC
PERFORMANCE


REF: ABUJA 2831


Classified by Ambassador Howard F. Jeter. Reasons: 1.5 (B &
D).



1. (C) SUMMARY: Ambassador Jeter hosted a second meeting
with Chiefs of Mission of Germany, France, Canada, and the
U.K. on October 15 to discuss upcoming Nigerian elections.
This meeting concentrated on the flawed registration
process, elections monitors and the need for an agreed upon
standard by which to judge Nigeria's 2003 elections. The
group agreed that it should meet with INEC before
discussing appropriate responses to its perceived failings.
The group also agreed to meet again following an expected
meeting with INEC. End Summary.



2. (C) Ambassador Jeter invited the Chiefs of Mission of
Germany, France, Canada and the U.K. to continue
discussions (reftel) October 15. Canadian High
Commissioner Howard Strauss, reflecting the broad consensus
of the group, commented that the flawed registration
process was the most pressing issue. He commented that
this group needed to consider whether to support the
political process directly through INEC or indirectly
through NGOs. "Without our support," Strauss commented,
"the process is doomed to failure." Acting British High
Commissioner Charles Bird cautioned that the group should
avoid two pitfalls: "we do not want to validate a flawed
process and we do not want to be seen leading INEC." The
group agreed that without more information from INEC, it
would be impossible to assess the process. While all
agreed on the flaws, it is still impossible to attribute
the poor performance of INEC to either incompetence or
malfeasance (or a combination of the two). The group
agreed that Canadian High Commissioner Howard Strauss
should pursue the promised meeting with INEC and report
back.



3. (C) Discussion of monitors for Nigeria's elections
took a back seat to the immediate registration issues. The
group agreed that the President and INEC were "passing the
buck" on invitations for elections monitors, each,
according to Ambassador Jeter, claiming that the other bore
primary responsibility for decisions on international
monitors. Bird suggested "breaking the circle" by
coordinating a list independently. DCM Andrews concurred,
suggesting that a joint U.S.-U.K. list of proposed
locations of U.S. and British monitors might assist the
UNDP in developing its own priorities.



4. (C) Ambassador Jeter raised the issue of elections
standards, asking if the INEC and other elections
structures had sufficient capacity to come close to a
"free-and-fair" election. Varying standards were suggested
including the Carter Center report from the 1999 elections
and the SADC standards, developed during the recent voting
in Zimbabwe.



5. (C) COMMENT: All attendees at this meeting agreed
that meeting with INEC was necessary before pursuing
discussions on the viability of elections in 2003. The
group continues to provide a useful forum for comparing and
coordinating positions related to the upcoming 2003
election cycle. In collaboration with these like-minded
countries, we will continue to use every opportunity to
reinforce our message to Nigerian elections officials,
individually and collectively, as the 2003 elections
approach.
ANDREWS