John Dunn, emeritus professor of Political Theory at King’s College, London, posits that “democracy is not synonymous with good governance”. In other words, the fancy use of the term “democracy” simply doesn’t birth the practice of accountability and fairness in democratic nations. In his seminal book, ‘Breaking Democracy’s Spell’ (2014), Dunn argues, in clear terms, why this oft praised system of government is replete with “unstable, vulnerable […] and continuing danger” in the so-called democratic countries.
The general failure to “comprehend” the concept of democracy, he states, amplifies deep “instability” in governance. His assessment holds certain truths: democracy most times thrives on racial/tribal divisions, malicious capitalism and widens the gap between the haves and the have-nots. Yet, many third-world countries exercise this borrowed system of government without proper analysis, and oftentimes espouse the monstrous characteristics of democracy.
This is not to suggest that democracy is not laden with advantages but a look at the practice in most African nations, for instance, in a country like Nigeria, shows that the system is used to defraud and oppress the hoi polloi.
In an article “Election Administration in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic: A Guide for Election Managers and Students”, the writer claims that “history of elections in Nigeria shows that it has been characterized by massive frauds, the intimidation and even assassination of political opponents”. These characteristics have their historical precedence.
In 1959, James Robertson, Nigeria’s last pre-independence governor-general, orchestrated a stunning electoral process, which, according to one Nigerian historian, was created to “thwart Nigeria’s progress and undermine the authority of the new [political] elites”. That is, the newly elected governor-general and later president, Nnamdi Azikwe, and Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa were both set up to govern a nation characterised by various cultural differences. The politicians were tools in the hands of the colonialists. Nothing worked.
Another scholar of Nigerian literature and history argues that the newly imposed independence gifted to Nigeria by colonialists set the country “into a cycle of pathos”. Arguably, the historical pathos still haunts Nigeria in contemporary times. The leaders have not learnt from history. They’ve not been able to move away from the colonial trap.
Of course, total democratisation of nation-states takes time and works with consistent dialogue, positive practical approach and implementation of policies. Are Nigerians, however, having these dialogues? Are Nigerians asking the right questions about democracy as practised in their country? International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) proposes that for democracy to work accurately in Nigeria, it must include a broad section of the society, embody the aspirations of all Nigerians, and it must fight against the culture of the elites’ attachment to power. IDEA’s proposition sounds good but it is what it is, an idea, which the political elites are not willing to put into consideration.
As the Nigerian presidential election drew nearer, strong echoes of this type of disastrous democratic practice danced devilishly in the Nigerian social context. First, the political elites in Nigeria, in their bid to hold onto power, bastardized the tenets of democracy.
If anything, the senseless peregrinations of Nigerian political zealots seeking votes, the ping-pong attacks by party loyalists, and the general hogwash spewed by many Nigerian party followers point to the chilling reality that Nigeria is divided on dangerous tribal and religious lines which the current aspirants use for their campaign.
The terms Islam and Christianity are used interchangeably to win souls for parties. Religion has become a political tool. Northern Nigeria and Southern Nigeria, which hold the highest number of Muslims and Christians, respectively, have become platforms where these political gods preach about their desire to lead the people across the Red Sea. Poverty, too, is another avenue for political exploits.
Some days ago, loyalists of the two major parties in Nigeria were caught on camera sharing gift items to members of the public as they campaigned. This reiterates the fact that the Nigerian political elites don’t care about suffering Nigerians.
The people see this but still follow the politicians blindly. They are mere pawns. Some would argue that voting in the right person would stop the mess. However, now that the presidential election has been held, I’d argue that before voting at subsequent elections, Nigerians must ask the right questions. Is Nigeria really a democratic state? Or, is this Nigerian democracy?
A female friend of mine recently argued that democracy in Nigeria is “currently characterized by immense experimentations”. Of course, when practising what one has not totally understood and analysed, what follows is a process of trial and error. She further argues that “the usual procedures of enthroning democratically-elected governments in Nigeria are still marked (even marred) by administrative and executive trials and errors”.
Indeed, the electoral process in Nigeria, to elaborate her point, is based on probability. No one is certain about the outcomes. But, how can certainty be possible? Godfathers and sponsors control the country. Then, the question again is, is this democracy?
In an interview with journalists in an Abuja rally against oil subsidy, Patrick Obahiagbon, formerly a member of the House of Representatives, quipped, “What we have in Nigeria is cabalocracy” – a “government of the cabal, by the cabal and for the cabal”. Who is the cabal? Where are the cabals? How can these cabals be uprooted? When can Nigerians really ask for more from their leaders?
It is not enough that Nigerians rushed to the polls yesterday, March 28. In addition to exercising their rights to vote, they also need to ask pertinent questions about how they can attain a collective freedom. The people have the power, and should learn to exercise it aggressively and wisely.
Michael Irene
