SIR: Currently, Nigeria has over 10,000 wards rooted in 774 local government areas and these wards serve as the smallest units of political parties across the nation. Sustaining such party system cannot be isolated from financial sponsorship hence the lavish monetization of Nigeria’s politics.
The money culture ballooned in the 90s with the lavish culture of the military era just as money rains during Jos Convention that preceded the memorable 1993 election saw the pockets of party delegates well fattened. Ever since, the political terrain has been hijacked by money bags.
Spending limit has been introduced into Nigeria’s electoral system to check the threats of monetization or corruption. For example, Section 91 of the Electoral Act, 2010 (old provision) titled, ‘Limitation on Election Expenses’, provides that the maximum election expenses to be incurred by a candidate in a presidential election shall be N1bn; governorship election, N200m; Senate and House of Representatives membership election seats, N40m and N20m, respectively; state House of Assembly membership election, N10m; chairmanship election for a local government area or area council, N10m; and councillorship election in an LGA or area council, N1m.
The National Assembly has since raised the figures by about 500 per cent, especially for the presidential election. The electoral bill raised individual donations from N1m to N50m in Clause 91 coupled with a provision that stipulates that an accountant who falsifies a document relating to expenditures or donations involving candidates will be liable for imprisonment for a term of 10 years.
Nigeria’s democracy is undoubtedly getting more expensive and the political hunts becoming a “billion naira game”. Examining advanced democracies, I discovered that in Canada, a registered party must file annually within three months after the end of every calendar year coupled with a financial statement providing details of all contributions received in a year and a special statement for individual donors whose contributions totalled $250 or more. Contestants are expected to appoint auditors. In UK, prior to 2001 general elections, there were no spending limits for elections and the 2007 election was reported to have cost £140m. The maximum fine for exceeding spending limits according to UK’s electoral commission is £20,000.
The political game seems to be more expensive in USA. In 2008, the total amount spent on federal elections was $5.3 billion; presidential race alone was $2.4 billion. Barack Obama spent $730 million.
Thinkers like Noam Chomsky and Michael Hudson have raised voices against “corporate hijack” of America’s politics. The spending limit regulation called disclosure requirement is not efficient enough as not-for-profit organisations and trade association groups can raise unlimited amounts from corporations and individuals. Campaign sponsors who are mostly rich entrepreneurs are toasted and romanced for campaign sponsorship by congressmen – a long-term threat to America’s democracy.
The over-monetization of Nigeria’s politics is a big threat not just to our political evolution but to our social fabric as corruption will be more enabled in public service and criminals with money will find an easy passage into public service coupled with the rise of money culture above “thinking or idea-based culture” necessary for productive leadership.
It is agreed that funds are needed to sustain political grassroots, logistics and other expenditures which will cost a lot for political parties. However, solutions on how these challenges can be resolved without disrespecting the political realities include strengthening the spending limit law by enacting a special electoral spending Act that provides more clearly how spending should be audited and vetted by electoral body, re-adoption of active party sponsorship of candidates as practiced in the 50s and 60s (first republic) in which only financial party members that pay annually will be allowed to serve as delegates in primaries and such membership dues can be a large source of campaign finances against the current practice of political monopolization by state governors or individual sponsorships by moneybags.
This model is more inclusive and will naturally reduce the cost of forms for aspirants and make the party more independent of rich individuals.
- Mujib Dada-Qadri,
Abuja.