By Emeka Omeihe
Lagos State governor, Babajide Sanwo-Olu delved beyond the ordinary when he interrogated certain features of citizen-government relations he considered impediments to genuine expression of the democratic spirit and the sovereignty of the people.
In a terse presentation that deviated substantially from the stereotypes we are accustomed to, he fingered the appellation, ‘Your Excellency’ as one of those features that obfuscate the understanding of the real relationship that should exist between governors and the governed in a true democratic setting. He raised issues with the title ‘Your Excellency’ contending that it appears to confer on the office of the governor the toga of an epitome of excellence; a temple of perfection and a throne of purity- attributes he ascribes only to the almighty God.
Apparently not satisfied with that appellation which he says spreads a demi-god aura across the entire machinery of the executive arm of the government;symbolizing an authoritarian disposition on the governed, he said he would not have anything to do with the title henceforth.
Sanwo-Olu also adduced religious reasons for his action. For him, since only the almighty God, our creator is the Most Excellent, no man or woman can share that attribute with him. For this reason, he divested himself of Your Excellency title and wants to be simply addressed as Mr. Governor. The new appellation in his view, will constantly remind him that he has been chosen out of so many to serve humanity without losing sight of our imperfections and mortality.
The issues canvassed by the governor are as weighty as they are thought provoking. It is good a thing he took out sometime to interrogate some of theconcepts and precepts we take for granted; precepts designed to enthrone highermoral values but constantly abused and debased by leaders. Such inquisition iseven more relevant in our clime because of the gulf between precepts and exemplary conduct. We are good at appropriating any and every symbol or perquisites of public office. We are also good at flaunting and celebrating titles and honors without giving a thought to the sacrifice and high moral demands they oftenentail. The governor must have seen through the incongruity between the concept of Your Excellency, the conduct and the activities of those so addressed that he feltsufficiently challenged to put the concept on the scale.
And what is the sense in adorning a title its bearers constantly devalue through acts of omission and commission? Had our elected leaders been living up to the high moral values envisaged in the conferment of such titles on them, Sanwo-Olu maynot have found himself in the current frustrations that compelled him to strip himself of that title. His action should therefore serve as a challenge to those who parade such titles without giving a thought to the huge responsibilities they bestow on them.
Yet, there are issues with some of the conclusions of the governor. YourExcellency which is a universally accepted honorific title is given to certain high level officials of a sovereign state, officials of international organizations or members of an aristocracy. There is little literature on how it evolved overtime but it equates with cardinal virtue, distinction, excellence, virtue etc.
Conceived this way, it is a clarion call for excellence, distinction and higher valueson all those the title is conferred. When a governor is addressed as His Excellency, he is being called upon to show distinction, to strive for excellence in both his private and public conducts. He is being called upon to strive for perfection since only the almighty is perfect and excellent. It is a reminder to the sacrifice such a leader has to make to justify the arduous responsibilities entrusted on him by virtue of his office. There is nothing inherently wrong raising the moral and performancebar expected of occupiers of such offices.
It is an admission that such officials are not infallible and only by striving for perfection will society take full advantage of their mandate. It is neither intended to confer the toga of a thin-god on them nor authoritarian disposition which at any rate is a negation of democratic ethos. Where you find leaders with anti-democraticor authoritarian dispositions, it is doubtful if its root can be located in that appellation.
Yes, there is ample evidence of scant regard by public office holders for the high expectations their offices entail. The conduct of some of our governors (past and present) has continued to question the propriety in their continued retention of such titles. We have seen governors arrested and convicted for looting the public treasury. Such misdemeanors are patently inconsistent with the vision embodied in the concept of your Excellency.
Governors have been caught taking bribe and indulging in such dirty activities that make mockery of their continued retention of such appellations. There is neither anything excellent about the conduct of some of these leaders to deserve the appellation nor do they make conscious efforts to strive for perfection. Sanwo-Olu has good reasons to quarrel with the continued retention of that title by our present tribe of leaders.
Yet, it is incorrect to posit that the title ipso facto, impedes genuine expression of the democratic spirit and the exercise of the sovereignty of the people. Neither can it be reasonably argued that its disposition negates the sovereignty of the people and equates with authoritarianism. We can argue that that title has become a misnomer given the serial inability of our leaders to live up to the high expectations of their offices. We may as well root for its abrogation given the gap between what it is expected to make of our leaders and what they usually turn out to be.
But it remains inappropriate to blame the fault-lines of our democratic engagementon the disorientation arising from either the purported celebration of the office of the governor as a paragon of excellence or the demi-god mystique surrounding that office. Issues that impede the genuine expression of the democratic spirit in our society and meaningful exercise of the sovereignty of our people have little to do with the way the office or power of the governor is perceived.
The social contract account of the theory of state does not also corroborate that linkage. Man in the state of nature got so fed up with the atavism of that order thathe had to give up some of his rights to a sovereign who will in turn protect him. But he also retained some rights to keep the sovereign at check as ultimate sovereignty remains with him.
This relationship adduced as the origin of modern states involves rights, duties and obligations- citizenship reciprocity. Overtime, this relationship evolved into the democratic order with the powers to effect leadership change devolving on the people through the instrumentality of periodic elections. Through the periodicity of free, fair and credible elections, the people regularly make a choice as to those who will preside over their affairs.
It is the serial sabotage of this cardinal principle of democratic engagement through rigging, falsification of results and sundry unwholesome conducts that impede genuine expression of the democratic spirit and meaningful exercise of the sovereignty of the people. It has nothing to do with the appellation of Your Excellency and the high moral bar it imposes on leaders. At any rate, our leaders striving for excellence and perfection will lead to outcomes that will serve public good. We are better off with higher benchmarks of conduct than lowering the bar just because many are not living up to expectations.
Even as Sanwo-Olu has divested himself of that title, he should not lose sight of the fact that the new title may not make any difference without serious personal commitment to public good. Democracy is not intended to make saints out of leaders. It admits that leaders are very fallible. That is why it sets standards and provides for periodic elections for incompetent and corrupt leaders to be shown the way out. It is leadership perpetuation against the collective will of the electorate that negates the democratic spirit, democratic engagement and sovereignty of the people.
Leave a Reply