The Nation Newspaper

Tag: democracy

  • Chaos and travails of liberal democracy

    Making sense of the goings on in the British parliament these past few weeks, over Prime Minister Theresa May’s proposals for UK’s final exit from the European Union, is truly confounding. The acrimony, bad blood, bitterness, ruthless inter-party and intra-party savagery saw the hapless leader fighting simultaneously for three things: saving the badly fractured United Kingdom from potential national disintegration; ensuring regime survival; and valiantly staving off intra-party challenges to her remaining as the head of Her Majesty’s government. These are, without dispute, Herculean tasks! I pitied her, as she simultaneously fought off hawkish members in her own ruling coalition and the savage opposition reaching straight for her jugular. It was vicious struggle for dear life, much like one between a hapless gazelle in a desperate struggle to escape from the deadly grip of a ferocious and hungry lion. Politics just doesn’t get any bloodier than that!

    British parliamentary form of liberal democracy subjects the leader of government to daily harangues and relentless bombardments from the Opposition bench. Theresa May has, temporarily, survived the proverbial “Night of the Long Knives.” The UK got itself into this intractable political mess when the former Prime Minister Donald Cameron called for a referendum to decide whether the UK should stay in or leave the European Union. To his consternation, majority voted to leave the EU, and this democratic decision has turned out a horrible nightmare that Britons now wish had never happened. Unfortunately, those politicians and polemicists (Boris Johnson, et al) whose virulently anti-EU rhetoric roused the people to vote for Brexit chickened out, abandoning responsibility to an anti-Brexit Theresa May to now pilot the nation through the tortuous labyrinthine negotiations. The truth is that whichever way it finally turns out, the United Kingdom is still the loser! And as things currently stand, it will require uncommon political sagacity and statesmanship to manage the eventual outcomes, for it carries grave implications for the future and corporate survival of the United Kingdom.

    One take away from it all is how truly chaotic liberal democracy has turned out to be! Though the British have perfected and practised this Westminster form of liberal democratic system for centuries, it still does not necessarily make it any less cumbersome, ponderous and chaotic, as every prime minister has to literally stay permanently awake, watching out for the perennial shenanigans of opponents and dissenters within the ruling party, as well as from the opposition parties across the aisle. It is thus the destiny of prime ministers to constantly fend off intra-party challenges to leadership and from the opposition bench angling to bring the government down. Indeed, this parliamentary system is intrinsically chaotic, and Britain is only the latest victim of its inherent mortal flaws and instabilities. Italy has for decades emblematized that chaos. Since the end of the Second World War, it has had no fewer than 61 governments, with prime ministers going and coming as if they are riding a revolving door!

    Some credit must go to the founding fathers of the American state, for their ingenuity and foresightedness in creatively tinkering with the British model, making it less chaotic to guarantee greater stability in government. Instead of the fusion of executive and legislative powers in parliament, they innovated with clear and unambiguous separation of the powers of government into three coordinate compartments, i.e., legislature, executive and judiciary. They settled for a strong executive presidency. But as it is with all political systems, it contains its own peculiar contradictions and flaws. For example, disagreements between the executive and legislature over budgets have been known to lead to mutual muscle-flexing, political grandstanding that needlessly create gridlocks and occasional government shutdowns, but nothing compared to the magnitude of instabilities and chaos of the parliamentary system.

    Perhaps until the recent political rumblings across Europe, not much attention had been paid to the inherently chaotic, fatal, threatening and disruptive nature of liberal democracy. But they are coming to the fore more forcefully with the increasingly contagious, extreme right-wing, anti-establishment populism sweeping across Europe’s political landscape. If anything, these catastrophic manifestations in Britain, the violent and virulent anti-Macron mass protests in France, and the upsurge of extreme right-wing populism in places like Germany, Hungary, Poland and others, are being egged on by the Donald Trump example, causing political leaders across the globe to begin to rethink the utility, feasibility and sustainability of liberal democracy. This is also giving oxygen to democracy’s mortal enemies and principal traducers to harden their opposition to it.

    As recent studies have shown, the decline of liberal democracy, a system which has been under consistent assault, is being aided from within the ranks of its own adherents, rather than from outside forces, as was the case during the Cold War. Rather than ideological adversaries assaulting and subverting it from outside, liberal democracy is under grave threats from its own unresolved internal contradictions, which its traducers of course are merely capitalizing upon. Harvard University professors, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, have shown in their latest seminal book, How Democracies Die (2018), that when democracies die, they do so no longer via the instrumentalities of revolution or coup d’état as in the past, but often times from within, by institutional atrophy, and from gradual but deliberate internal subversion by those, such as Donald Trump and Viktor Orban, who came to power by democratic elections.

    On their own, Third World leaders are paying close attention to the disruptions and chaos currently wracking the very bastions of liberal democratic order, the former colonial countries that had imposed it upon them. Since this did not have any deep roots either in the culture of the respective colonized nations or even in the authoritarian and unaccountable colonial rule itself, it took less than half a decade for it to catastrophically unravel through coups d’états, assassinations, and programmed retreat into one-party dictatorships. Though democratic rule was later restored from the 1990s, as a Western-imposed political conditionality after the Cold War, it has however begun to suffer serious setbacks and reversals in recent years. Africa’s autocrats have become quite adept at manipulating the levers of democratic rule – multi-partyism, written constitutions, periodic elections, adult suffrage, and stipulated term limits – to ensure that they remain in power perpetually until death! Robert Mugabe, at 94 years had to be removed by a coup after 36 years in power; Paul Biya, at 85 years old and in power since 1982, only recently ‘won’ victory for another seven-year term of office as president of Cameroon; Yoweri Museveni and Paul Kagame, in power since 1986 and 1994 respectively, have tinkered with constitutions to remain in power for as long as they please. The list is long! And they have China and Russia to draw inspiration from. These two exemplify the strongman rule that African rulers are jealous of. It is perhaps not for nothing that African leaders are cozying up to China, a one-party Communist dictatorship, whose model they find attractive.

    Judging from its debilitating contradictions and internal discontents, the questions that may justifiably be posed are many: has liberal democracy exhausted its possibilities and come to the end of its tethers? Is it still capable of self-re-invention and reforms, or we are witnessing its gradual but inexorable denouement? For Africa and other parts of the developing world where democracy had never really been deeply rooted, are these chaotic manifestations not themselves a great disincentive to persuading autocrats and dictators to adopt it? With the exception of democratic exemplars like Botswana, Ghana, Senegal, South Africa and few others, Africans may just be witnessing the gradual withering away of liberal democracy as their leaders increasingly admire and emulate the stability of strongman rule in China. The enemies and traducers of liberal democracy in Africa may finally be gaining an upper hand.

     

    • Professor Fawole is of Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile Ife.

  • Democracy and disciplined political party are Siamese twins

    Nigerian governors wield enormous powers. And answerable to none including the electorate in an era when ‘stomach infrastructure’ has become a substitute for party manifesto; they are perhaps the most powerful political office holders in the world. For them, voters are nothing but mere participants in a four year periodic ritual called election. They are also untouchable because they have constitutional immunity which precludes them from prosecution even for criminal offences while in office. And with some of them presiding over huge budgets sometimes bigger than those of some African countries, governors in Nigeria are dispensers of patronages. And because they control their party state structures, they are the custodian of elective and appointive positions.  The fate of LGA, state and National Assembly office seekers is therefore in their hands. We must not also forget that governors’ words are laws. They once declared 17 greater than 19 during one of their forum’s elections and Jonah Jang who by their crooked logic won by securing lower votes celebrated his victory by doing a thanksgiving in his church.

    Although governors approve mouth-watering severance packages covering houses in their states and Abuja, periodic change of cars and salaries for life, they never retire. They just ease themselves into the senate after installing their preferred successors. This has been the narrative since the beginning of the fourth republic in 1999.

    In fairness to outgoing Imo State governor Rochas Okorocha and his Ogun State counterpart, Ibikunle Amosun, who have been under great stress and strain these past weeks, they have not demanded for anything extraordinary. All they have tried to do after securing their party’s ticket to the senate in the 2019 election was to follow an already established tradition of installing their own successors. Then came APC new  chairman, Adams Oshiomhole who during his own time  criss-crossed  the whole of Edo State selling his preferred successor to the electorate as if his life depended on it, now armed with  a  retroactive law targeted at those he describes as ‘dynasty and empire’ builders.

    The two governors who have so much in common have however sworn that Oshiomhole and APC will know no peace except their demands to impose their successors are met. Already Ibikunle Amosun has said that his anointed candidate, Adekunle Akinlade, has his “full blessing” to pursue his governorship ambition in the Allied Peoples Movement (APM). “I, Senator Ibikunle Amosun will not work for any other candidate that they are rooting for to become governor”, he recently declared with a ring of foreboding finality. He has also expressed open support for another 26 of his aggrieved loyalists that crossed over to APM to contest for Ogun State House of Assembly seats.  Rochas Okorocha has also adopted Amosun’s template. They have also sought relief from the courts despite the dangling of  ‘Article 20, Subsection 10’ of APC constitution which talks about charges of ‘subversion of party regulations for members who fail to exhaust the party’s intermediation processes before going to court’ by chairman Oshiomhole.

    Unfortunately, the problem is not with the two governors who have done no wrong by trying to observe existing PDP and APC protocols. The tragedy of our political party system is located within our ill-equipped military that whimsically destroyed our political socialization process in 1966 and went on to arrogantly arrogate to themselves the powers to teach Nigerians that started experiment on party formation in 1923, how to form political parties. Babangida hilariously decreed short-lived  NRC and SDP  (1990-93) followed by  Abacha’s ‘five fingers of a leprous hand’ with his Congress for National Consensus (CNC), Democratic Party of Nigeria (DPN) and the National Centre Party of Nigeria (NCPN) among others and the military packaged PDP, consisting of   groups such as the G-18 and G-34.  PDP has since its formation in 1998 run by garrison commanders led by President Obasanjo who shuffled senate presidents and party chairmen according to his mood. Audu Ogbeh once narrated how Obasanjo had a lunch of pounded yam with him  after which he brought out from his pocket, a prepared letter of his resignation as PDP chairman for him to sign.

    Far from being a political party, PDP is an association of traders and rent seekers camouflaging as one. Anxious to recoup the funds they claimed they expended on 1999 election, they hurriedly set up PPPRA, an instrument their members according to a house probe deployed for stealing about N1.7trillion under fuel subsidy scam. With their self-serving monetization policy, they shared inherited landed properties dating back to the colonial period. With its ill-implemented privatization policy, they shared our budding industries among themselves. Only last week, APC national leader, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu reminded Nigerians of how PDP spent $16b on the power sector and went on to share it among themselves on the eve of their departure from office all in the name of privatization.

    It was not long PDP imploded over sharing of spoils of office with Bukola Saraki and some others joining APC. By his own admission, Saraki confessed selling his new party’s victory for a pot of porridge in order to snatch the presidency of the senate. There-after, he made the country ungovernable for about three years before crawling back to PDP where he lost his presidential bid to Abubakar Atiku, who by his own periodic haggling for presidential ticket among Nigerian parties has also demonstrated his lack of abiding faith in the ideals of a political party.

    Of course the APC, until the emergence of Oshiomhole not too long ago, was seen by many as an extension of PDP. Its elected senators and House of Representative members are marketable commodities.  Although both houses are controlled by APC, elected party members have behaved more like opposition working against the policies of their president.

    As for Amosun and Okorocha, a part cannot be holier than the whole. By their own antecedents they have not shown they are any different from their PDP and APC trading colleagues. Okorocha had decamped from the PDP to the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA). He was suspended by APGA in December 2011 for allegedly storming the Imo State secretariat of APGA with dozens of thugs, who allegedly beat up several top officers of the party. But despite his suspension by APGA, he went on to win the 2011 election.  Rochas decamped to the All Progressives Congress in 2013. For the 2015 he also went on to defeat former deputy speaker, House of Representatives, Hon. Emeka Ihedioha. Amosun was also first elected to the seat of Ogun Central Senatorial district in 2003 on the platform of ANPP. He failed to win the 2007 governorship election and thereafter joined ACN where he won the 2011 and 2015 elections. With their antecedents, it is no surprise they have chosen to now run with the hare and hunt with the hound.

    I sympathise with Oshiomhole, the APC chairman. His argument in support of a crusade for a strong disciplined political party is unassailable. The 600 years head start Europe and other industrialised and developed democracies had over the underdeveloped societies have been attributed to the ingenious creation and deployment of disciplined political parties as modernization agents by European political elite of the 15th century. The golden age of our nation, 1952-62 was the period our founding fathers, Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe, Ahmadu Bello and Obafemi Awolowo, relied on political parties (NCNC, NPC and AG) as modernization agents.

    Democracy and disciplined political party are like Siamese twins. One cannot survive without the other. If Oshiomhole and his APC are serious about consolidating the democratization process, this is an opportunity to take a decisive action even if it involves using the big stick against Amosun and Okorocha who appear not to be in a hurry to jettison their old ways.

  • We stand for participatory democracy, says APC

    The All Progressives Congress  ( APC ) has said that it will defend participatory democracy where  elections are transparent, credible, free and fair.
    It however asked relevant government  agencies to monitor the activities of the PDP as its recent utterances according to the party  are a red flag. 
    The National Publicity Secretary,  Mallam Lanre Issa-Onilu said in a statement in Abuja that recent calls by the PDP National Chairman,  Usher Secondus asking The INEC Chairman  and Inspector General of Police was suspect.
    He said the PDP was being hunted by its past actions when they misused state machinery  to achieve selfish motives.
    The statement reads: “We are amused by the latest utterances of the Chairman, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Uche Secondus calling on both the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Yakubu Mahmoud and the Inspector General of Police, Mr. Idris Ibrahim to resign on account of the PDP’s baseless suspicions ahead of the 2019 General Elections.
    “It is a pity that the once boisterous PDP, having undermined the country for 16 years through mindless undemocratic actions, has now become a caricature of a political party.
    “This latest outburst is yet another reminder of how the PDP government serially abused state institutions in the pursuit of selfish political and economic interests. PDP is now being haunted by its sordid past and the ruinous party is now scampering from its own shadow.
    “It is sad that the PDP hounds have continued to take Nigerians for granted, thinking by embarking on scaremongering, the voters could forget their wanton crimes.
    “Nigerians are not gullible, it is now apparent that the PDP in a bid to hide their inadequacies and undesirability as elections approaches has chosen to populate the public space with unfounded allegations.
    “The All Progressives Congress (APC) continues to stand for and would defend a participatory democracy where elections are transparent, credible, free and fair. We also call on relevant agencies to monitor the PDP as its recent utterances are a red flag. We must prevent a reoccurrence of the PDP’s typical undemocratic practices during elections. Never again will a selfish few distort the wishes of the electorate.”

  • ‘Electoral violence threatens democracy’

    ELECTORAL violence, if not quickly nipped in the bud, is a threat to democracy in Nigeria, a candidate contesting for a seat in the Lagos State House of Assembly under Kosofe Constituency 1, Mr. Adekunle Afariogun, has said.

    Afariogun issued this warning during a news briefing to mark his return to the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    He said until urgent measures were taken by the government and Independent National Electoral Commission to arrest the spate of killings and destructions before, during and after elections in the country, it would be difficult for Nigeria and its people to fully reap the benefits of democracy.

    Afariogun, who initially left the APC as a result of what he described as injustice allegedly meted out to him and others during the recently concluded party’s primaries, said he decided to return to the progressive fold after wide consultations, especially after being given assurances of redress by the party’s National Leader, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

    He said pending when things would be fully sorted out, he had advised and positioned his supporters to work for the success of the APC during next year’s general elections.

    “There is urgent need for the government, INEC and all relevant stakeholders to come together and fashion out a viable means through which to tackle electoral violence. Without peaceful conduct of elections, our democracy cannot thrive and as a country, we will never be able to reap its full benefits.

    “To ensure that I contribute meaningfully to the progress of our democracy, I have returned to the APC after being prevailed upon by our National Leader, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu. I and my supporters would work for the success of the party during next year’s polls and also ensure that we curtail violence during the polls,” Afariogun promised.

  • Democracy and pro-poor development in Nigeria

    The idea of universal basic income has gathered traction in some circles particularly in Europe and Canada. The idea is that most countries in the world can afford to get their citizens paid living stipends rather than continuing with maintenance of the current gulf presently existing between the rich and the poor whose salaries are not living wages. This, it is argued, is not some kind of communism but that it will require redistribution and equity in the way national wealth is shared. It is also suggested that if everybody is paid basic income it will lead to more national wealth because it will increase the demand for goods and consequent increased production. Other spinoffs will be reduction in crime and consequent reduction in state apparatus for maintenance of peace, law and order and that the manpower tied up in internal maintenance of peace can be redeployed to more useful and positive enterprises such as farming and industrial production and other productive enterprises. I must say the idea of universal basic income still needs better articulation and rigorous examination. But whatever its shortcomings may be, the present payment of the dole and welfare Cheques in the western world has only succeeded in permanently banishing a large proportion of the people to living below the poverty line. The present system can only alleviate poverty and not eradicate it as basic income would do. Of course people in the poor countries of the world who are left to fend for themselves without state support will be too glad to receive welfare payment like people in the western world.  There is of course the need for an attainment of a certain level of mobilization and production before one can talk of basic income payment. But in places such as Nigeria where we are told 64% of our people are living in absolute and abject poverty we need to do something to tackle this problem no matter how unorthodox the means we adopt. First we need to be producing something and our people first have to be mobilized and be in the money economy before we can begin to talk about basic income. Basic income is not meant for the kind of huge unproductive bureaucracies that consume most of the wealth of developing countries. A universal basic income must be tied to gainful and productive employment.

    The problem of poverty must still be addressed not in the way we are currently trying to do it by giving paltry loans of N10 thousand to poor people directly by governments.  I personally do not believe we should be sharing recovered Abacha stolen funds among millions of poor people in small bits and pieces. What business can anyone do with N10,000 or N50,000 loans  than selling roasted peanuts and roasted plantains or such puny businesses ? I know many people will say such little monies can turn the lives of poor people around but I think we should be raising the bar.  The recovered loots should be used for concrete things like building roads  , schools, hospitals , housing and improving infrastructure and opening up the country for commercial enterprises. Signs should display boldly that such important infrastructure were done with recovered stolen money. I think what needs to be done  to deal with poverty is to direct the  commercial banks through the Central Bank to set aside substantial funds to give as loans to young people particularly graduates of polytechnics and universities and possibly high school graduates who cannot proceed further but who want  to go into small businesses with emphasis on agricultural production and particularly adding value  to for  farm produce for local consumption and export. The vast majority of our people are not graduates of any sort whether of high schools or tertiary institutions. There must be a separate  program for such people. Financial assistance and farm inputs such as free fertilizers would have to be provided as well as advice for preservation of produce that cannot be sold . We need to revive marketing boards for agricultural produce to maintain reasonable commodity prices from year to year so that farmers can be assured of stable prices for their produce. This was what the commodity boards did for our farmers during the pre-independence and immediate post-independence years before the soldiers came and did away with commodities boards to promote so called market forces. Since then, production has plummeted and farms have been abandoned to old people who are dying out.

    Bill Gates while addressing the federal executive in a rare privilege granted him by President Muhammadu Buhari had strongly suggested that Nigeria must do more for their farming communities who are in the majority. He had said controversially, in my view, that roads and railway construction though important must however be aligned with the people’s needs because development is about people.   For example he was not impressed in situations of ten lane high way running from Abuja Airport to the city  which he says does not make sense where roads leading to and from the ports are left dilapidated and unmaintained for years . The same can be said for roads joining the oil producing areas with the ports of oil exportation as well as links between the productive and economic Centres necessary for the growth of the economy being left dilapidated for years. Where will the money for this programme come from?

    It is generally known that the percentage of people paying taxes in Nigeria is too low . That is the truth . People everywhere always try to avoid payment of taxes.  This is more so in Nigeria where the masses tend to feel they would not benefit from government programs. I like what the government of Lagos does after every project is completed; they would put a sign board saying the project has been paid for by taxpayers’ money.  This should be copied by all states and the federal government.. The other way to get more funds into government coffers is to shift to consumer  and sale taxes and value added tax rather than poll or direct income tax . If we can minimize corruption and reduce the ballooning bureaucracies at federal state and  local government  levels of governance , monies will be released for the basic income and assistance to everybody in a win-win situation. The important thing to stress is that we in Nigeria have reached a turning point in which we must think outside the box to tackle the problem of poverty. This problem is daily manifested in the insecurity pervading the whole country. We see this in the farmer/ herder killings and cattle rustling in the pastoral zone in the north of our country. We see the same in armed robbery  and kidnapping and human trafficking and desperate movement by young people to cross the desert and the Mediterranean Sea to the shame of most of us who see our young people enslaved and perishing in the Sahara desert. Many of our elite can no longer go to our towns and villages in the country. We all seem to be marooned in the big cities and even in the cities we are barricaded behind tall walls and our houses are guarded by ferocious dogs. This is not living. The rich can no longer sleep because the poor are awake.

  • Democracy in Nigeria

    The crowd of people wanting to contest election to be president of Nigeria in 2019 has given any intelligent Nigerian food for thought. When one looks at the individuals who want to be president, the question one asks himself is who has asked them to contest? What are their qualifications? Why are others not contesting? Do these people truly believe they have something to offer? What are their visions and missions? Are they representing themselves or hidden interests? What are the operational instruments of their promised service delivery?

    Why are they all politicians who have held offices before and made lots of money? Where are the real makers of Nigeria like trade unionists, teachers, doctors and engineers and others producers of national wealth? There was a study done on the USA senate and it was found out that 85% are lawyers.  Why are our senators and those running for president retired public servants? These are possibly eternal questions which many people ask in countries with democratic system of government.

    Right from the time of its origin in ancient Athens, democracy has had its limitations as a system of government. Franchise was limited to only citizens and men. Women, slaves and men who were under the age of military service were not eligible to vote or be voted for. But the good thing about Athenian democracy was that any citizen could be a candidate to be voted for. The system had its antithesis in the military dictatorship of Sparta which was more efficient and effective but not enduring. The synthesis of these two systems was the representative democracy which evolved in 19th century Europe especially in revolutionary France since 1789. Even then the vote was tied to property ownership and national military service (levee en masse). Before this time particularly after the declaration of American independence from Great Britain, the idea of representative government based on limited franchise based on property right had become the norm in democratic practice. This is why critics dismissed this as bourgeois democracy and the state and its bureaucracy as organized instrument to protect the bourgeoisie. The so-called “rule of law” is a clever way to defend the rights of the property owning class. This debate recently came up with President Muhammadu Buhari’s raising the debate about raison d’état and regle de loi. This was a philosophical question which was debated under Rousseau’s concept of the General Will which needed not be the sum total of the wills of individuals in the society but could indeed be the will of the minority or a few or even one person manifesting the knowledge of the higher interest of the good of the society.

    The possibility of this idea being hijacked by a ruling class or even one person is the reason for the fear by society that this can be manipulated. But this fear does not obviate the possibility of a few people rather than the crowd of people knowing what is in the overall interest of society. Democrats the world over have distinguished between mob rule and democratic rule. The difference is that those the French called the crowd may not know what is good for the society whereas the educated propertied class presumably know. This was amply demonstrated during the French Revolution by the descent into Jacobin terror which only the man on the horseback, Napoleon Bonaparte’s military intervention put an end to. The excess of democracy can either lead to dictatorship of the Left or the Right. As shown during the French Revolution, there are times when in the national interest, a strong government is needed to guarantee the larger interest of the people.

    Now back to the horde of contestants for elective offices in Nigeria. One of the problems in the case of Nigeria is that political parties that are normally designed to aggregate the views and interests of the people are either absent or inchoate. Political parties are normally built around enduring philosophy or ideology which shows a group’s world view (weltanschauugen) and how the group would want to shape the society which it wants to govern. In advanced democracies like the USA or the United Kingdom, belonging to parties is taken seriously. The Conservative and Liberal parties in the United Kingdom have existed in one form or the other for centuries either as Tory or Whig parties. Even the younger Labour Party has been in existence for more than 100 years. The same can be said for the Republican and Democratic parties of the United States. On the continent of Europe particularly in Germany, one can trace the ancestry of the existing political parties for more than a hundred years. In France, people seem to coalesce around tendencies and policies of either the Left, Centre, Far left and extreme Right. Whatever the case may be, one does not find parties existing without the cement of ideas, ideologies or philosophy of government. Perhaps because of the low education of our people, parties at least for now, only approximate ethnic, religious and regional interests. This makes it difficult for effective national parties to exist and politics therefore seems to be about sharing of whatever wealth exists and not about building or creating the wealth. Policies put in place do not build up the nation but rather emphasize the ethnic fault lines and division. Yet, during the last stages of colonial rule in Nigeria and elsewhere in Africa, we had mass parties like the NCNC (National Convention of Nigeria and the Cameroon (citizens) and la rassemblement nationale Africaine in many African countries in West Africa. Of course, even these so-called rallies were assemblages of all kinds of groups of students, trade unions, tribal unions and so on and were doomed to emphasize fissiparous tendencies in later years even before independence. The Action Group founded by Awolowo and the Yoruba elite was tightly organized party around the person of Obafemi Awolowo but broke into pieces when it tried to transform into a proper ideological and national party. Its counterpart, the Northern People’s Congress (NPC) was pure and simple, a regional party formed to defend its regional interest. The Northern Elements Progressive Union (NEPU) of Aminu Kano was formed to defend the interest of the talakawa in the northern part of Nigeria. In other words it too did not have a national political horizon.

    Does this mean that political party formation in Nigeria is doomed and dead on arrival? One may also ask if regional and ethnic parties are of necessity bad in a plural society of different ethnic groups and different interests. These interests may not necessarily be in conflict and even if they are in conflict, are they not to be negotiated since we cannot change are neighbours? Who better to negotiate our mode of association if not people we can relate to because of our primordial ties?

    In a developed country like Germany, there is a Danish party with representatives in the local parliament in the state of Schleswig-Holstein. In Italy, there is a German party in South Tyrol (Alto Adige) and German Party in Belgium formed strictly to defend the ethnic interests of Danish and German minorities in those countries. In other words, there may be nothing wrong in people coming together to defend certain particularistic ethnic interest. This was the idea embraced by Chief Awolowo in his suggesting creation of states based on linguistic consanguinity and affinity. This would have meant some states will be large while others may be small  like in California, Texas and Rhode Island respectively but the feeling of ethnic freedom would make up for whatever imbalance may exist in the larger confederation.

    Ahmadu Bello seemed to have agreed with Awolowo but to an extent but that the historic boundaries would also count along with language. The point I am making is that perhaps the political parties of the past should have been built upon instead of decreeing into existence soulless parties not rooted in our history. Perhaps what would have evolved is the perennial coalition governments characteristic of Germany and Italy which would have taken care of the hue and cry about marginalization and exclusiveness. This would not have been perfect but neither is the present lopsided democracy in the favour of plutocracy perfect. How many ordinary Nigerians have the millions being demanded by parties for right to contest in their primaries? Our so called “fledgling” democracy has a long way to go and a situation of a few rich people of doubtful provenance imposing themselves on the vast Nigerian humanity is not my idea of democracy.

  • 2019: Saraki visits Fayose, says democracy at crossroads

    •Urges PDP presidential aspirants to accept primary outcome

    Senate President Bukola Saraki yesterday visited Ekiti State in continuation of nationwide consultations ahead of the presidential primaries of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    He met with Governor Ayodele Fayose and other PDP delegates at the Government House, Ado-Ekiti to solicit their support at the October National Convention in Port Harcourt where the party’s presidential flag bearer will be elected.

    The presidential aspirant stressed that he possesses the qualities of the leader needed by Nigerians at this critical period of its history promising to give every Nigerian a sense of belonging.

    Saraki said Nigeria is at crossroads with its democracy endangered claiming that democracy would have collapsed but for the intervention of the National Assembly which he heads.

    The Senate boss pledged to accede to the demands of Nigerians for restructuring for the states in the federation to maximize their potentials.

    Saraki said: “We are at a cross road. We are seeing great danger with our democracy, that is why your state has had a terrible experience with the kind of democracy.

    “If not for what we have been doing at the NASS to sustain and protect the democracy, by now there will be nothing like democracy in Nigeria.

    “So, it is important that we look for a courageous and capable President that we can be proud of. A President that will ensure that we have true democracy.

    “Before now we have been voting based on sentiment, and ethnicity, so we need a leader that will allow you to reach your goal, it is time we restructure and have a state that would be able to maximise their potentials.”

    Fayose advised PDP presidential aspirants to accept the outcome of the party primary election slated for October 6, 2018 and work for the success of the party.

    The governor, who said that he was not supporting any particular aspirant, said he had cautioned his colleagues that they must allow the process to be credible.

    Fayose said: “Nigerians are waiting for PDP to liberate them and we must be united to be able to rescue them.”

    Threatening to back out of the primary election if the process is not credible, Fayose alleged that the future of the country had already been mortgaged.

    He added:  “Somebody should tell Buhari to please go home and rest. The last appointment President Buhari made into the Department of State Services (DSS) further confirmed that he is insensitive. He is supposed to be the President of Nigeria.

    “We never know we can get here. I am sure that you joined the APC because you thought that Nigeria will be better. Nigeria no longer have gear one to five, everything is now in reverse gear. ”

    On Saraki’s entourage are Director General of Campaign Council,

    Mohammed Wakil; Senate Minority Leader, Senator Biodun Olujimi; Chairman, Senate Committee on Air Force, Senator Duro Faseyi, among others.

     

  • ‘Vote-buying, threat to Nigeria’s democracy’

    Prof. Ra’uf Ayo-Dunmoye of Political Science Department, Ahmadu Bello University (ABU), Zaria on Thursday identified “vote-buying” by political parties as a serious threat to Nigeria’s democracy.

    He made the observation in a paper he presented during a public lecture organised by the Nigerian Union of Journalists (NUJ), Zaria unit in collaboration with ABU Mass Communication Department held in Zaria, Kaduna State.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the theme of the lecture is: “The Role of Media and Political Parties toward ensuring credible, free and fear elections.”

    Ra’uf-Dunmoye, who spoke on the role of political parties towards credible elections, said if what happened recently in Ikiti election was something to go by, such action would negatively affect the credibility of the nation’s democracy.

    The Don said democracy allows people to select whoever they want to lead or represent them through the process of election without external influence, especially money or threat.

    He observed that democracy was referred to as a universally recognised ideal based on values common to people everywhere, regardless of cultural, social, political and economic differences.

    “Democracy is meant to protect and promote with dignity and fundamental rights of individual and instill social justice and social development.”

    Ra’uf-Dunmoye stressed the need for political parties to step up efforts towards ensuring internal democracy through transparent primary elections to guarantee success of the forthcoming general elections.

    He, however, lamented a situation where governors hijacked the leadership of parties and appoint their loyalists as candidates into different elective positions irrespective of whether they qualify or not.

    In his paper entitled: “The Role of Media toward ensuring Credible, Free and Fair Elections”, Dr Yakubu Suleiman of ABU Mass Communication Department, observed that media had a greater role of enlightening and sensitising the public on the 2019 elections.

    He frowned at a situation where journalists ask for money before publishing stories, lamenting that some editors collect inducements in the form contracts to get stories published.

    Suleiman charged the media to be unbiased, corrupt-free and remain patriotic before, during and after the general elections for the good of all.

    The ABU Vice Chancellor, Prof. Ibrahim Garba, who was represented by Malam Sama’ila Shehu, Director, Public Affairs, said the lecture was timely in view of the forthcoming general elections.

    While appreciating the efforts of the NUJ and Mass Communication Department for organising the programme, the VC urged them to sustain the collaboration for the benefit of both parties.

    Ealier, the NUJ Chairman, Kaduna State Council, Alhaji Adamu Yusuf had said that there was perception that months preceding elections in Nigeria usually come with all kinds of disturbing reports.

    He identified such disturbing reports to include; hate speeches, name calling, harassmen, killings, thuggery and intimidation among others.

    “So, our gathering here today will no doubt find possible ways of preventing them. For an individual, group or nation to grow and develop, the enabling environment must be created.

    “Such environment must be made free for all to serve, hence the need for these two major stakeholders in the country’s electoral process to come together.

    “As one of the critical stakeholder in promoting democracy, be rest assured that the Nigerian Union of Journalists will promote free, fair and peaceful conduct of 2019 general elections,” he assured.

    NAN reports that the occasion drew participants from across political parties, INEC representatives, lawyers, security agencies, traditional rulers and students among others. (NAN)

  • Democracy without democrats

    The day Gen. Ibrahim Babangida sacked Gen. Muhammadu Buhari, martial music took the airwaves. Soldiers in well-starched green uniform or camouflage flooded the streets, horsewhips and guns in hands to whip the citizens into line. It was a cycle the nation was becoming used to.

    A voice came on the radio. It was Brigadier-General Joshua Nimyel Dogonyaro: Fellow countrymen, the intervention of the military at the end of 1983 was welcomed by the nation with unprecedented enthusiasm. Nigerians were unified in accepting the intervention and looked forward hopefully to progressive changes for the better. Almost two years later, it has become clear that the fulfillment of expectations is not forthcoming.

    The voice of the man Dogonyaro spoke on behalf of—Gen. Ibrahim Babangida—soon boomed on the radio: When in December 1983, the former military leadership, headed by Major-General Muhammadu Buhari, assumed the reins of government, its accession was heralded in the history of this country. With the nation at the mercy of political misdirection and on the brink of economic collapse, a new sense of hope was created in the minds of every Nigerian. Since January 1984, however, we have witnessed a systematic denigration of that hope. It was stated then that mismanagement of political leadership and a general deterioration in the standard of living, which had subjected the common man to intolerable suffering, were the reasons for the intervention. Nigerians have since then been under a regime that continued with those trends. Events today indicate that most of the reasons which justified the military takeover of government from the civilians still persist. The initial objectives were betrayed and fundamental changes do not appear on the horizon.

    Hitherto shadowy figures began manning positions and lost their anonymity. Decrees were promulgated to replace the constitution. It was a cycle the nation was becoming used to.

    But contrary to the promises made, Babangida messed up for years. He capped his nonsense by annulling the June 12, 1993 presidential election and lost the opportunity to remedy the nonsense that his administration was. General Sani Abacha made further nonsense of the directionless bequeathed by Babangida, while the late MKO Abiola who ought to be the president was rotting in jail. The reasons for military takeover were never justified. They simply wasted our time and stole our money, largely.

    Then came 1999 and democracy. Almost twenty-years down the line, we are yet to start crawling, not to talk of walking and far away from running. Our politicians are just a little better than the military. In a lot of sense, many of the players on the political scene are yet to be cured of the military hang-over. A sizeable number of the key players even have garrison mentality. Ours is a democracy without democrats. Selfish interests are masqueraded as national interests. The good of one is sold as the good of all.

    In the last few months, we have seen defections upon defections. Lawmakers abandon one party to join another and defending it as if it were based on sound principles.

    The defections and the reasons behind them are interesting. Let me use the example of Ibrahim Shekarau, former governor of Kano State, who has returned to the All Progressive Congress (APC) from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Shekarau had joined the PDP in 2014 citing “a lack of transparency and accountability” in APC. His spokesman, Sule Ya’u Sule, said he decided to return to the ruling party over lack of internal democracy in the PDP.

    Shekarau had said at the time of the APC: “We intended with the merger to form a solid foundation for the entrenchment of democracy. The Legacy Group sacrificed all interests for the merger, but for the past six months, all agreements reached by the merged parties had not been met. No clear leaders, no registration of APC members at any levels. This shows a clear lack of commitment, transparency and accountability.”

    One wonders if transparency is now practised in APC! The Bukola Sarakis of this world will certainly not agree with him. Neither will former Vice President Atiku Abubakar.

    Then there is this other case which makes further believe we want democracy, but are not ready to be democrats: My heart broke when a group of new breed politicians behaved like the people they said they wanted to replace. Motivational Speaker Fela Durotoye was chosen to represent them through a shadow election, but the ink with which his name was written was yet to dry when many of the others in contention rubbished the exercise that produced him. It is more painful giving the fact that these are people with little or no chance of winning the presidential election!

    I saw deceit when Atiku shed tears because some people bought him ticket to rescue Nigeria from Buhari. So, Atiku loves Nigeria so much to shed tears for it? For me, it looked like a case of subsidising the rich; no, the stupendously rich. It has nothing to do with the much-professed desire to entrench democracy. There is absolutely no doubt that the Buhari administration has not met our expectations. Things have changed. Certainly, but at a ridiculously slow speed. Yes, they say slow and steady wins the race, but when vital decisions are left untaken, things degenerate and that is my grouse about the president’s style.

    If there is another thing that has shown me that we run our democracy without democrats, it is the objection of some All Progressives Congress (APC) governors to direct primaries, which will give party members a choice in picking candidates. Their Excellencies are rotting instead for consensus or indirect primaries. To be sincere, they have not broken any law because their party’s constitution allows it. But what better test of popularity is there than direct primaries? My conclusion is that their Excellencies are simply afraid that their popularity among party men and women is not enough to guarantee their lackeys picking the prized tickets.

    A particular His Excellency is intent on installing a successor who I had the misfortune of meeting recently. The governor-in-waiting found it difficult to express himself in English language. He was saying “we does” and “he do” and had no idea he was murdering Queen’s English. May be government business will be conducted in his native language. After all, grammar no be success, apologies to Sir Shina Peters.

    My final take: Until we are ready to follow the best democratic practices, we will just be deceiving ourselves. We will continue to lag behind in the comity of nations; we will continue to play second fiddle; and we will remain static while deceiving ourselves that we are on the march.

  • Democracy and the politics of exclusion and confrontation

    There  is no doubt  that in Nigeria the battle line is drawn  between those who  want  to  replace President Muhammadu Buhari  as Nigeria’s president and his die hard supporters who believe he is the god sent leader t  to  turn Nigeria round, no  matter  the odds. It is not just politics as usual  this time around. It  is a do or die situation because the stakes  are  so high there  may be at least  10 formidable Nigerians  in the opposition PDP  lining  up to  get  their party nomination to unseat  the Nigerian president.  That competition in the opposing  camp to the president  is  potentially  fiercer than the  coming  presidential  election  itself. It  is a clash  of the titans of Nigerian  politics over the years. You  may  call it a fight  in which everyone is for himself  and may the devil  take the hind most.  Such  is the nature and mood of Nigeria’s politics  today that has provoked the topic of the day.

    But  such  politics of exclusion  and confrontation  is not peculiar  to  Nigeria  and it is our  intention today  to  trace its roots and  see why  the  human virtues  of tolerance, accommodation  and mutual  respect are fast abandoning the realm of politics in most nations of the  world  today.

    It  is necessary  to highlight  some events to illustrate  the high level  of tension  and potential  violence  in world  politics today.

    Let  us  for  now, if possible  ignore Syria, Iraq  and Yemen which  are the hot theaters  of war and destruction  nowadays  such that people  are wondering how if  ever  Syria will  be repaired  and reconstructed  and yet  the war  has not  ended. We  shall  look  at the social  issues  that  are at the bottom  of  many  provocative reactions in most  nations today. Religion  has always been the leading issue  in this  regard  and  spawned  9/11 , Al Quada, Boko Haram  and ISIS. But  cultural  issues  are  causing  more  tension nowadays.  Issues  like  gay  right,  migration  and  feminism.

    That  was what happened in Germany  this week  when  the news spread  that  two Arab  immigrants  have killed a German trying to protect  a lady  from them. That  was dangerously  followed  by the observations of some non  rightist  Germans that  they are concerned that  any one  who  opposes  immigration  in  Europe  is branded racist  and  that makes it difficult to  make comments and people are worried of being excluded  and silenced  on a major  issue  in their nation. That  means  that  in the EU  some  silent  majority  is just  waiting to explode  some day  no matter  the excuses  and advice from  German Chancellor Angela Merkel  on the matter.

    Similarly  in  Nigeria  it was  difficult  to talk  about Boko  Haram openly  because  of Muslim  sensitivities  and the general  belief that  Islam  is  a religion of  peace. Yet  Boko Haram  and  ISIS claim an  Islamic mandate  for their  terrorism and  bloodletting. Till  now  the Nigerian  army has not been able  to suppress Boko Haram  because of this  religious  affinity of those even in the army to take on Muslim enemies. It  is a daunting task  that needs great dispassionate  intelligence  and collaboration from all  the security oufits in Nigeria  to  achieve  in the interest  of  the  Nigerian nation.

    Really it is the duty of the Nigerian  government to fight and defeat the enemies  of  the nation no  matter  their origin or affiliation. The  matter  of killings  by so called armed  herdsmen follow  this manner of  handling the Boko  Haram  insurgency. For now most  Nigerians believe that Myetti Allah  is being treated  with kid gloves  because  it is a Northern  organization  and the president is both Muslim and Fulani  like the herdsmen. The  fact  that the President once  publicly lamented that if he did not go to school  he would be a Fulani  herdsman  has  not  helped  matters. It  is my candid  belief  that  the president  must  show  all  Nigerians  that nobody  is above  the law where the security of all Nigerians in all parts of Nigeria are  concerned.

    Similarly  I  hold  the strong view    that  democracy in Nigeria must    be seen  as capable  of lifting  Nigerians out  of poverty and  not  a sure way  to die  in dirt, squalor  sickness  and insecurity. Democracy  should  not be seen  as creating  an emergency and exclusive  class of rich citizens whose  main  business is that they went into politics  and  made  money,  and  a lot of it too.  Democracy  should not  be seen  as  an  elevator  that  makes retired  military  officers automatic  governors after elections  and automatic senators  after governorships.  That  is the trend now copied by civilian governors  who  now live in the  state  houses and legislature  for 16  years  and get  so stupendously  rich  that  they become a state  within a state  in terms  of political  power  and influence.

    They  have  now  become  such  a  serious  threat  in our  democracy  to  any meaningful  political  participation  and competition  by  other Nigerians  equally,  if  not better qualified,  but lacking  their  huge  financial  muscle  fattened by years  of looking after  public  funds  and getting fat  at it.

    Right  now in Nigeria the show down  between  the Senate President and the presidency is overshadowing  even  the primaries  to choose a presidential  candidate  for  the  opposition  party. The senate president  has declared his intention  to be president  but he just defected  to  the  PDP  and that may  polarize  even  the PDP leadership.  Has the opposition  the discipline to prune down aspirants to even two  to face  the primaries  for presidential candidate  election?  Can the senate president  suppress his ambition for the highest  office of the land in his new  and old party? And  will  the senate president  be in office till  the primaries for  PDP  are  held?  These  are  the questions  begging for answers as we approach the 2019  elections  and  you  must  admit  like the Chinese  are  famous  for  saying    that  we live  in very interesting  times  indeed here in Nigeria. Once again, long live the Federal  Republic  of  Nigeria.