Agbo Agbo
We are in a dire strait at the moment. With the palpable tension generated by insecurity across the country; economic issues are rarely on the front burner these days – even the government’s social investment programmes.
This is a huge and debilitating challenge. Enormous resources are being channeled toward containing these security challenges making the economy to suffer in the process.
Poverty and unemployment are on a steep rise and the elusive youth question – their active participation in politics and governance – falters.
“The demand for the recognition of the right of young people to be heard,” says the 2009 National Youth Policy, “to have their views given serious consideration, and to play an active role in promoting their own best interest has seen a growing acceptance worldwide in the past decade.
This demand represents a profound challenge to traditional attitudes towards young people in most societies of the world…The age-old propensity of adults taking decisions concerning young people in their absence is at variance with the commitment respecting the participatory rights of young people.”
This excerpt from the National Youth Policy, I believe, raises a number of questions. Are Nigerian youth marginalised in the political processes on account of their age? Do they lack adequate political voice beyond the informal powers they arrogate to themselves in the social media?
How did Nigerian youth find themselves in this situation? Is the problem peculiar to the fourth republic or has it always been there? Is it a case of a particular stage in the evolution of the Nigerian state rolling back the political powers and voice that the Nigerian youth once had?
What lessons does history offer for engaging the problem as no nation can experience sustainable development with such a marginalised youth population. Is it proper for Nigerian youth to simply sit by and wait for power to be “created” and “handed” over to them?
Can they agitate for a political base without a concomitant economic base? These are predominantly political questions that involve the good or ill use of power. They will engage our attention as we address this all important subject.
Following a genuine youth outcry, the #NotTooYoungToRun bill was signed into law by President Muhammadu Buhari on 31 May, 2018. It lowers the age at which Nigerians can contest political offices.
The success of the campaign was made possible by the support given to the campaigners by the National Assembly and the state houses of assembly across the country. The idea is that anybody who is old enough to vote should be old enough to run for political offices.
However, I am of the opinion that the #NotTooYoungToRun lacks the capacity to remove the more fundamental reasons for lack of youth participation in Nigerian politics.
Does it automatically change the mindsets of the ruling élite about the “fitness” of the Nigerian youth to occupy prominent political positions in the country? What is more, does it help to meet the financial obligations of participating in Nigerian politics?
Section 91 of the Electoral Act 2010, as amended, provides that a presidential candidate can spend a maximum amount of N1 billion, while a governorship candidate can spend a maximum amount of N200 million.
The Act also provides that a senatorial candidate can spend a maximum amount of N40 million, while a candidate for the House of Representatives can spend a maximum amount of N20 million.
For state Assembly election, the Act sets the limit of N10 million, while local government chairmanship and councillorship elections had limits of N10 million and N1 million respectively.
We all know that Nigerian politicians spend far more than these amounts during elections. In a society where the minimum monthly wage of workers hovers controversially at N30, 000 it is nearly impossible for any honest young man to raise the specified amount to boost his chances in a system where most things depend on money.
Of course, there’s a way of circumventing this predicament. Turn to “political godfathers” for support. But these political fathers hardly see the young people as ‘good people’ to ‘invest’ their money upon. Their political godsons are usually “matured” people.
This is probably because of the mindset that older people are better for the political offices or can be trusted to meet the terms of the transactional relationship.
Ironically, the political godfathers depend on the “immature” youth for attaining their goals of rigging elections. They use them to snatch ballot boxes and unleash violence on political adversaries during elections.
Perhaps we should ask: does age really matter in politics and governance? Will governance automatically improve in Nigeria simply by transferring power the youth? Is Nigerian badly ruled today because of the age of the rulers who have continuously refused to act like leaders?
I make bold to say the answers to these questions is no. This answer is in harmony with an altercation between the late former UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan and one Imani Umoja in 2018 as reported by howafrica.com. Prior to the altercation, Kofi Annan had called on Africans to stop voting for Presidents above the age of 70 years.
“This is a false argument” Umoja was quoted as saying. “Whether they are 70, 80, 30 or 40 years of age is not fundamental.
Age is not a class or scientific indicator of consciousness. Essential for Africa and humanity is how democratic representatives apply ideology/culture into practice.
Africans must be organised into a mass permanent revolutionary party to totally liberate and unify Africa with scientific socialism and in coordination with anti-imperialist forces in the world…”
While there could be an element of agreement that age might not be “a class or scientific indicator of consciousness,” there is ample evidence in this knowledge age to suggest that “a class or scientific indicator of consciousness” has a lot to do with age.
Unable to break the glass ceiling of politics on their own, some of the Nigerian youth denied formal political voice have empowered themselves by becoming bloggers and citizen journalists in the social media. They focus on making public the information the government would have preferred to stay hidden.
The high number of their followers is enough evidence of the tremendous public support they enjoy. They take full advantage of the social media appropriated to express themselves on societal issues that affect the masses or a particular social group. Transforming these “voices” into coordinated and positive actions remains a challenge.
Often, the battle is against the political élite who reflect ‘self-seeking’ interests the youth perceive antithetical toward their chances. They reveal cases of official corruption by state officials and supposed and real acts of bad governance.
On the positive side, the social media definitely enables the youths to take their suppressed voices back. They no longer have to rely on official media to express themselves.
On the negative side, some of the youth use the social media to promote hatred for other Nigerians on grounds of ethnicity, religion and party politics. Worse still, some out rightly generate fake news. These are the fringe elements that weaponise anti-youth feelings among the political elite.
Like the rest of Africa, Nigeria is in bad shape today because no efforts are being made by the citizens to imbibe development-relevant political ethos.
It will therefore be utterly naïve to assume that power will be created and handed over to the youth. This won’t happen in Nigeria in the foreseeable future. What is needed is for Nigerian youth to properly organise themselves by adopting a more altruistic approach to the development of the society.
They should come up with convincing ideology driven politics totally different from what obtains presently. It is only through superior solutions that they can be taken seriously and make headway. But in doing this, experience also counts. Governance – especially in a complex society like Nigeria – is serious business.
