I see a time when a person with disability will be Nigeria’s President — Jake Epelle
Every eligible Nigerian should have the unalienable right to vote and be voted for. As Nigeria’s democracy matures and develops, it is critically important that it embraces the principle of fairness and inclusivity, particularly for Persons with Disabilities (PWDs).
In this thought-provoking interview, Mr. Jake Epelle, the Founder and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of The Albino Foundation (TAF) Africa, addresses the need to have PWDs in both elective and appointive offices across the country.
Before and during the 2023 General Election, your organisation was at the vanguard of advocacy to ensure that Persons with Disabilities (PWDs) have an unhindered and equitable opportunity to vote and be voted for, even the opportunity for appointive positions after elections. Can you tell us about how you engaged relevant stakeholders in this regard?
Well, there’s no hard and fast rule about the engagement of stakeholders. The moment we were set on what we wanted to do, which was to enhance the participation of persons with disabilities in political and electoral processes, which includes elected and appointed positions, we first embarked on critical stakeholders mapping. We were able to identify critical stakeholders in different categories; the overall critical stakeholders which are the community of persons with disabilities, then the secondary critical stakeholders which are the state actors, in this case, we are talking about the electoral management body, political parties, security operatives, security agencies, the media, and the society at large.
This critical stakeholder mapping helped us identify who the responders are and the people we can approach to ensure this happens. After that, we began to look at specific project thematic areas that can enhance what we wanted to do.
We came up with a few project interventions. One is to serve the electoral management body and political parties. The other one is to target the security operatives, and of course, the government. So, we launched initiatives like the “Able2Vote” voter education campaign for persons with disabilities, bringing them face-to-face with the electoral management body; the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)
We embarked on data mining. We were able to collect data, even though it was just a little. Eventually, we were able to engage the electoral management body. We trained them, including political parties, the media, and security operatives, and sensitised the community of persons with disabilities, bringing them face-to-face with key stakeholders.
It’s also worth mentioning here that before our engagement in this process, disability inclusion in the electoral process was on the back burner; nobody was talking about it. There were a few mentions here and there, but there was no strategic intervention and interrogation of the processes that led to what we have today, as a result-oriented outcome.
During the 2023 General Election, there were reported cases of insufficient and unavailable assistive devices for PWDs. How did this affect the number of PWDs who voted during the election?
In fairness to the electoral management body, which is INEC, magnifying glasses are expensive, and the electoral management body did not capture devices in its budget before the Electoral Act was passed into law. That law came into existence in 2022, which we championed. We were the leading organisation. I think the European Union sees that as a major milestone.
Repealing the 2010 section 54, subsection 1 and 2, we replaced it with section 56, subsection 1 and 2, which had just one word that created a lacuna, and that one word was “may”; that INEC “may” reasonably accommodate persons with disabilities. So, we were able to strategically, through concerted advocacy, change that clause to “shall”. So, it became a law, and what the INEC Chairman and INEC institution did was to run around to see how they could reasonably accommodate, not provide all devices, but provide some reasonable devices to meet the needs of persons with disabilities. They did, but it wasn’t sufficient, and so to implement effectively, they decided to take off some states and focus on some states where they would distribute the devices. So, it wasn’t a national spread. It was a pilot kind of intervention, and those states that they worked on had the devices.
I will tell you that there were other challenges other than just providing devices. But the devices that they had were grossly inadequate. That’s why organisations like ours are calling on institutions like INEC to put that forward to the development partners who are supporting them to acquire these devices and deliver to them. Magnifying glasses were not the only inadequate or insufficient devices. There were issues with the braille ballot guide for the blind and Form EC30 PWD for the deaf. Of course, it affected their participation because some persons with disabilities were not able to use the devices. The lack of these devices and the inability to properly educate the users resulted in very reasonable voter apathy.
How does the funding that your organisation receives from the European Union help you in your advocacy and intervention work to marginalised persons, particularly to PWDs?
I have said it times without number, the European Union, in terms of funding, in terms of influence, in terms of engagement, has provided the biggest disability inclusion support in governance, not only in Nigeria but in Africa. And I say that authoritatively because I have gone around African countries, I have also been at the forefront of disability inclusion, especially in governance in Nigeria, and there’s no other development partner that has invested the much that the European Union has invested. Today, we are seeing results; we are seeing an increase in the number of persons with disabilities in the electoral space.
When we started, you could hardly count how many persons with disabilities were going for elective positions. By the time we were in the middle of it, we had gone from less than 10 people to over 30 people who were vying for elective positions. Also, we’ve gone from over 10 appointees to about 26 or more appointees. These are evidence-driven claims. So, the support of the European Union to TAF Africa has made us a leading organisation in the space; the most structured, most funded, and most visible disability organisation in the country, and that also has brought visibility to the European Union.
I don’t think that there’s any partner of the European Union that has the kind of visibility TAF Africa has today. And it’s simply attributed to the support of the European Union. That has also given us some level of influence, such that when people know that we are supported by the European Union, it opens some doors for us. Inclusivity is now on the front burner because of the support of the European Union.
How has the presence, partnership, and support of the European Union in Nigeria helped the country further strengthen its democratic governance?
So, I’ll take the three words – the presence, partnership, and support. For presence, I will attribute it to influence and visibility. The European Union’s influence and visibility in governance projects across the board, including in the three arms of government, state actors (which are part of the three arms of government), and non-state actors, have allowed them to establish their presence not only in the public but also in the field of social development. As a result, many NGOs are now adopting this style because of the level of presence they have created in governance, particularly around inclusivity.
So, what is their adopted style? They adopted the twin-track approach in project design for disability. Every aspect of the European Union project today has a disability component, and then, there’s a stand-alone disability project which is what we are implementing. That has brought a lot of positive presence, not just in terms of governance, but to the European Union. I don’t think any European Union project has given the European Union the kind of presence that the governance project has given them, whether it’s visibility, influence, advocacy, and sensitisation. The European Union has a tall influence today in the development space through the European Union Support to Democratic Governance in Nigeria (EU-SDGN) Programme I & II.
The other one is partnership. The partnership they have with local NGOs has sort of catapulted them to have a partnership with the three arms of government. Because of the funding that we have, doors have been opened to us. We can effectively, but humbly challenge the government. I have personally become a political pundit and analyst because of the backing and partnership that the likes of the European Union have given us.
Their partnership has created and resonated with silent voices, and today, we have the moral authority to confront abnormal issues within the government. Their partnership has resonated across the three arms of government. They have also been able to stand up and speak for the common good of the citizens.
In terms of support, the European Union didn’t just give us money because of our partnership, they continued to support us to scale up issues, to speak truth to power, and to strengthen our capacity for development. The European Union is providing capacity support; they are training us in finance, monitoring and evaluation, audit, and their processes. That to me is a holistic support. They are helping us to strengthen our organisation. They’ve conducted an organisational system audit in our organisation, which by the grace of God, we scaled through. The support is enormous.
I went to the European Union some 6 or 7 years ago. And the first one year, I quote what the EU Ambassador then, Ketil, said. He said, “I never knew that a small organisation like yours could be this effective. I wish we gave you more money.”
Since then, we’ve been growing. We did the first project, and by the end of the second project, they scaled us into a direct grant. To me, that’s holistic support that has brought us to where we are, and as a result of that support, we’ve had several other organisations who are not related to the European Union, but who had to give us an opportunity because we had the European Union grant. That to me is a huge support.
In terms of the number of PWDs appointed into government positions, what is the situation today, and how are you ramping up engagement and advocacy efforts to have more PWDs in elective and appointive positions?
When we crafted a holistic participation project in disability, we saw a window of proper engagement in governance. We saw the window of appointive positions as a veritable opportunity, and so, we launched what we call “Able to Serve,” just like we have the “Able to Vote.” “Able to Serve” is a vehicle that would do several things to create appointive opportunities. First is advocacy. We started advocating at the three arms of government, and even the private sector, to recognise the leadership potential and skills within the community of persons with disabilities and give them the opportunity to serve. While we were doing that, we also advocated within the community to pick up those who were qualified for the positions that we were advocating for.
The second strand of our engagement, leading to appointive positions and opportunities for persons with disabilities, was to bring together those who are interested in appointive office, and train them; giving them the capacity and the perquisite skills. We also went as far as identifying positions. The first thing we did was to begin to push the present government to appoint a person with a disability as a Minister of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
