DEMOCRACY (NIGERIA POLITICAL SYSTEMS)

Introduction

Democracy and Nigeria are like Siamese twins; though conjoined, they are uncomfortable and under intense pressure that could result in all forms of hurt, even death. Although, democracy may not be strange to an overwhelming percentage of Nigerians; what may be strange to them is the brand of democracy that invests, first and foremost, in human and material resources for the purposes of political stability, economic viability, scientific advancement, technological breakthrough, educational development and life-enhancing social services. Given the general optimism that Nigeria was going to be the bastion of democracy in Africa following her independence from Britain in 1960, one should normally expect that by now democracy should be deeply rooted and institutionalised in the country. Ironically and unfortunately, Nigeria, as far as the practise and delivery of dividends of liberal democracy is concerned, is yet a cripple that can barely stand let alone walk or run.

It can be safely assumed that democracy returned to Nigeria after the death of that military dictator, General Sanni Abacha.  The return of democracy started in 1999 after the often forgotten character named General Abdusallam Abubakar terminated the 16 army rule that featured General Buhari, General Babangida and General Abacha.  Thus, the Nigerian democratic experiment started in 1999 under the 1999 Constitution (as now amended).

In the Nigerian political history, political parties have appeared in various guises, and have also disappeared under different guises.  The famous names were the Nigerian National Democratic Party (NNDP of Herbert Macaulay) which dominated Lagos politics in the 1920s and 1930s, but later dissolved into the National Council for Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) of 1940s, 1950s, 1960s, before the civil war (1967-1970).

The dominant parties after the Nigerian Independence in 1960 were the Northern People’s Congress (NPC) led by Sir Ahmadu Bello, the NCNC led by Dr Azikiwe, and the Action Group (AG) led by Chief Obafemi Awolowo.  All these parties derived their political strength from their regional bases of the Northern, Eastern, and Western Regions of the country.   The polarization of politics in those days has remained a constant.

However, credit must be given to the military president, General Babangida for a subtle attempt to introduce political process in a strictly military environment.   By a fiat, two political parties were created – Nigerian Republican Congress (NRC) and Social Democratic Party (SDP), one to the Right and the other to the Left.  In fairness, the attempt was working until the annullement of the presidential election presumed to have been won by the SDP candidate, Moshood Kashimawo Abiola.  That single act by a military dictator made nonsense the idea that Nigerian people could elect their Leader.

The political drama of the 1990s ended with the dissolution of the two political parties of the Babangida era by another brutal military dictator, Sanni Abacha.  He allowed the replacement of the two-party structure with a multi-party system of five political parties, registered and funded by the Federal Military Government.

Those political parties, described by late Bola Ige as the five fingers of a leprous hand could not hide their true identity as each continued to nominate General Abacha as its sole candidate to contest as President of the country.  It was the death of the grand-master that put an end to the inglorious political experiment.

In the 1999 elections, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) won the presidential election against the combined opposition of the other strong parties, Alliance for Democracy (AD), and All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP).  A former Army General and Head of State Chief Olusegun Obasanjo won comfortably against Chief Olu Falae.

Though many Nigerians doubted the result but the Supreme Court ruled in favour of the PDP candidate.  Since 1999, the PDP has been controlling the governments of the federation and the majority of the states, leaving the opposition mainly of ACN, ANPP, CPC, APGA, and LP with the control of a few states.

Thus, the present political scenario is characterized by a single big and powerful party, and other divided and weak small parties.  The stronger party exercises almost absolute control on the political life and the resources of the country.  Its constant exercise of mediocrity is left unchallenged except through critical comments by some patriotic Nigerians. As at present, inefficiency in governance is no longer a consuming electoral debate because of a weak divided opposition.

Even, the present attempt by the opposition parties to merge and form a single but virile body is treated with levity by members of the ruling party and majority of ordinary Nigerians who seem to have lost confidence in political party structure.

In the present analysis, political parties have been treated as groups of people who form associations to take part in the art of governance and are so recognized and registered by the electoral agencies to take part in all elections.  So far, the discussions have been on the attitude of political parties and the welfare of the Nigerian people, irrespective of the party in power.  What is true of PDP is also true of the other parties in the states in which they come from.  As the PDP is a ruling power in the centre, so it is also an opposition party in the Lagos State or Yobe State.

What is observed as the PDP attitude of not allowing opposition to grow is also true of the other ruling parties of not allowing PDP to expand in their respective states.  Thus, the practice of democracy, which is the government of the people by the people and for the people, as represented in Nigeria by the political party system, has failed woefully because Nigerian people are not yet fully involved.

Unhappily, the Nigerians of today will not see themselves as Nigerians who are prepared to effect changes through collective actions.  Rather, they see themselves, or perceived by others as Hausa/Fulani; Yoruba; Ibo and of recent, Ijaw whose loyalty is to the leader and his ruling party.  Unfortunately, the ruling parties see themselves as local champions of their predominant tribes and not the parties for all.

This makes it very difficult to punish inefficiency and bad governance because of the principle of we must support our “son” under any circumstance.  So, political analysts who are dreaming of the defeat of the existing ruling parties should not forget the salient factors of tribal and religious sentiments and their obvious electoral advantages.

Although to many, the former President Chief Olusegun Obasanjo (not a true democrat), once noted that the essential ingredient of democracy is the freedom and the provision of choices for the people.  He noted that “crucial for me is that a democratic setting must involve a choice on personalities and a choice of programmes; fundamental human rights and obligations as well as freedom of expression.  The Greeks that bestowed democracy on the world did practice it without political parties”.  It then follows that to Chief Obasanjo and the present leadership of the PDP, “multi-party bickering is definitely a luxury we cannot afford”, even if it is recognized as one of the tenets of genuine democracy.

On the past and current criticisms of President Jonathan on governance, the relevant advice is that he should ponder on the words of the Proverbs (15:31-32) that, “If you listen to constructive criticisms, you will be at home among the wise, if you reject criticisms, you only harm yourself”.

Although, democracy is a universal concept, its practise differs from one place to another with regard to acquisition of (and disposition to) power and institutional arrangements. Hence, one can talk of American democracy, British democracy, Irish democracy, Canadian democracy and so on. It has been pointed out above that the concept of egalitarianism has more theoretical connotations than practical application. There is nowhere in the world where democracy is a republic of equals. Thus, socio-economic and political inequality is a prominent and permanent feature of democracy particularly in Nigeria where democracy has widened the gap between those who have access to power and public funds and those who do not. Since democracy is said to be government of the people by the people and for the people, it is therefore generally assumed that democracy is the most suitable form of government at least as far as the delivery of Ronald’s ‘political goods’ is concerned. It is therefore generally taken for granted that the pursuit of the welfare of the generality of the people is the epicentre of democracy wherever it is practised. While this may be so in some democracies, the reverse is the case in others like Nigeria: while democracy is synonymous with holistic development and aggregated growth in some climes; it is the representation of betrayal and inhuman deprivation in others. Nigeria probably personifies the latter.

While some countries aspire to and do indeed practise democracy for the socio-economic benefit of the generality of the people or at least as many people as possible; others, like Nigeria, make their own brand of democracy government of the few by the few and for the socio-economic benefit of the few. 

Indeed, the most outstanding feature of Nigerian democracy is mind boggling and unpardonable waste of public funds on the comfort of a few Nigerians. The democracy of waste practised in Nigeria invests, first and foremost, in the comfort of officials rather than in human and material resources.

History has shown that no nation of the world grew and enjoyed steady development in virtually all spheres of its national life without experiencing good and selfless political leadership. This is largely because qualitative growth and development has always been an outcome of good governance.

Commenting on the experience of the Nigerian nation, the renowned novelist, Chinua Achebe, insisted that the root cause of the Nigerian predicament should be laid squarely at the foot of bad leadership.

“The trouble with Nigeria,” Achebe argued, is simply and squarely a failure of leadership. There is nothing basically wrong with the Nigerian character. There is nothing wrong with the Nigerian land, climate, water, air, or anything else. The Nigerian problem is the unwillingness or inability of its leaders to rise to their responsibility, to the challenge of personal example, which is the hallmark of true leadership (Achebe, 1984: 1).

The followings are problems which characterise Nigeria political systems:

1.     Corruption: One of the greatest development challenges facing developing countries in today’s globalized world is the high incidence of political malfeasance and corruption. Nigeria, like most countries in the sub-Saharan African region has been vigorously confronted with the malaise of corruption.

The existence of political corruption in a democratic society (Nigeria inclusive) is perceived as an aberration. This is because the actual practice of democratic principles rest squarely on the legal code of society. Thus, the existence of high incidence of political corruption tends to have more serious consequences on democracies more than any form of government. This is so because it poses dangerous omen to the principles of democracy. There is a strong consensus among scholars that suggests that political corruption does no good to democracy.

2.     Lack of accountability: Politics in Nigeria is particularly plagued with the problem of lack of accountability which occupies an unenviable preeminence of place among these problems, Lack of transparency and accountability to the Nigerian people is a common thing visibly seen in Nigeria Public services and all phase of political system in Nigeria. The just past administration which should have brought in a breath of fresh air does not unfortunately appear to have a clear direction. It declared a commitment to due process but this is yet to be tested as lethargy seems to characterize the administration.

3.     Unemployment: Unemployment is a global issue and not peculiar to Nigeria alone but the case of Nigeria has become that which is described as" The bad state of a community is to the benefit of the elites". The Government has constantly Expressed it's awareness of the steadily increasing state of unemployment in Nigeria thus leading to almost all political office holders using statement like " the teaming unemployed youth" even though most of them do not know the meaning; but the copy-copy syndrome at work, and even the minister of finance said that the unemployment in Nigeria is giving her sleepless nights (sure? Who do we ask) and the president have equally made several statements regarding unemployment in Nigeria, but the question is, are they really doing anything about it? NO, NO and NO, they brought out one lottery program in the  name of YOUWIN and another they call SURE-P, (is this how unemployment is going to be tackled in Nigeria?), the worst of it is that when the president or the minister of finance is been asked about their efforts towards reducing unemployment, they will quickly refer to YOUWIN!, but the BIG question is: what is the cause of the increasing unemployment in Nigeria?.

4.     Religious cries: Religious crisis is a disagreement or disunity between two groups or one religion and or different religious group that militate against coherent existence or practice within or without themselves. This situation has existed from time immemorial. For example conflicts can arise within Christianity or Judaism or Islamism etc. And in such occasions it has resulted to factions and denomination. In another development it could be Christianity versus muslims, which we experience much often in Nigeria. The most recent one is the Boko Haram Insurgency in Nigeria which have led to the destruction of valuable properties and lost of thousands of life.

5.     Abuse of public offices: The saying “the centre can no longer hold because things have fallen apart” is credited to the renowned novelist Prof. Chinua Achebe and these words are very appropriate to describe what happens when there are flagrant abuses of power by the very custodian of these powers. There will inevitably be a moral breakdown and the weight of the burden will fall back on the masses because they are at the receiving end. Morality simply put, is the conformity of man’s actions with the requirements of what is right. There is no doubt that most of the actions performed by most of these public office holders defile and negate every moral standard of communal co-existence. Thus it follows logically that the abuse of power inevitably creates moral problems. Some of these moral problems translate into outright poverty on the masses, as they suffer denial of basic amenities, lack of proper health care delivery, unemployment and all kinds of deprivations.

CONCLUSION

From the review of political leadership and corruption in Nigeria thus far, it is evident that the problem with Nigeria is not just corruption but leadership failure. Corruption has attained an unimaginable height and is currently assuming a pandemic proportion in Nigeria through, and with the full support of the political leadership class since 1960. Obviously, as a nation, we cannot move on without looking back because a people without a history can be compared to a tree without roots. The fact is obvious that there really was never a golden age of great leadership in the history of Nigeria. The lack of competent, responsible leaders with integrity, vision, high moral values has been the bane of the country. It is simply disheartening that Nigeria, a country blessed with natural resources and manpower is now doomed with uncertainty where abject poverty, high unemployment rate, unresolved assassinations, looting and squandering of public funds, etc, all as a consequence of corruption, have become the order of the day.

No doubt, corrupt practices among the political leadership class have also resulted in undermining the growth and stability of the nation’s trading and financial system. As Nigeria seeks for more Foreign Direct Investments (FDIs), corruption tends to thrive more and impede the country’s ability to attract overseas capital. Corruption has also damaged economic development and reforms and if adequate care is not taken, it can hinder the growth of democratic institutions.

In conclusion, it is important to emphasize that the fight against corruption in Nigeria needs real patriots, men and women who are committed to the Nigerian project, not immoral personalities who want to serve their own or narrow group interests. It takes high moral rectitude to exercise the moral strength required to be an anti-corruption crusader in this country. That is why we say that given the high level of corruption in the Nigerian police, the Immigration Service, the Customs Service, the Prisons Service, the SSS, the Courts, etc, they cannot effectively fight corruption and other crimes.

 
RECOMMENDATIONS

In profiling solution to the problems bedeviling Nigerian political systems is most as a result of corruption in every phase of the government, the followings are recommended:

1.     To check corruption which has assumed epidemic proportions in the public services of this country, it is imperative for the National Assembly to amend the CCB Act to provide that:

a.      All political appointees should declare their assets annually by making annual asset returns every January, (ala tax returns) because the extant provision that requires assets declaration every four years have several loop holes that are being exploited by public servants.

b.     The CCB should create a unit within it for the continuous tracking of assets returns of politicians holding public office, senior civil and public servants, etc, similar to what the CBN does to check money laundering through the banks; 

2.     Reform the Justice Delivery system by replacing the status quo with a jury verdict system, through the ongoing constitution amendment process. You can trust the people to do justice to those who are corrupt, as members of a jury!

3.     Make it mandatory for the police to release everyone arrested without warrant within 12 hours. Remove their discretion to detain anyone beyond 12 hours except for crimes such as treasonable felonies and murders. This is vital because abuse of human rights and "sale of bail" is a lucrative practice in ALL divisions and units of the police. What obtains now is that the report of a crime in any neighborhood is an invitation for the police to line their pockets through indiscriminate arrest of everyone in that neighborhood for "bail rent".

4.     Routinely and quarterly, the Attorney-General/DPP/Justice departments should vet all occupants of police detention cells, custody rooms and those in prisons awaiting-trial to deliver innocent Nigerians from the corruption and inhumanity of the police.

It is time to fight for the soul of Nigeria. And it must, of necessity, start from its primary custodians: the justice administration system stakeholders. This is necessary in order to invest our justice delivery system operatives with the moral capital required to effectively do their jobs.

REFERENCES

Afolabi, M. O. (1993, May – June). A Bibliography of the Nigerian Governments' Commissions of Inquiry Reports and Accompanying White Papers from 1920 to 1986. Government Publications Review.Vol. 20, Issue 3 (p.297 – 358).

Anti-Corruption Initiatives in Sub-Saharan Africa. In Findings: Best Practice Infobrief, Africa Region, No. 38 (March 1999).

Asaju, T. (2003). “The Road to Yellow House.” Newswatch, December 22.

Atwood, J. B. (1998). “Corruption: A Persistent Development Challenge.” Economic Perspectives: An Electronic Journal of the U.S. Information Agency.

Chemers, M. M. (2002). Cognitive, Social, and Emotional Intelligence of Transformational Leadership: Efficacy and Effectiveness. In R. E. Riggio, S. E. Murphy, F. J. Pirozzolo (eds.), Multiple Intelligences and Leadership. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

http://www.vanguardngr.com/2013/03/nigerias-political-system-and-the-people/