Obasanjo and Democracy
By
Dr. Aliyu Tilde
Text of paper titled The Viability of Democracy in Nigeria: Issues of the Moment to be presented tomorrow, Saturday 23 March 2002 at CDRAT, Mambayya House, Kano. Text of endnotes not included here.
Introduction
This
paper attempts to discuss current issues regarding the viability
of democracy in Nigeria in light of the performance of the present
administration. The topic is chosen as a result of recent disturbing
development in the political landscape of the nation as 2003 election
approaches. After coming out of fifteen years of military rule,
Nigerians would not like to see democracy derailed, hence the need to
ensure the viability through adherence to democratic principles. The
performance of the present administration has been reviewed in light
of fundamental objectives of the constitution. The disturbing trend
towards 2003 has also been discussed. Finally, suggestions are given
that will guarantee the viability of the republic.
Fundamental Obligations
Nigerians would first like to measure the success of their democracy
by the performance of their elected governments. There is no better
yardstick for such performance than the provisions of the
constitution that defines the official obligations of public servants.
The first obligation of any government official is to conform to,
observe and apply the provisions of the constitution.
1
The constitution states that government of the Federal Republic of
Nigeria will be based on the principles of democracy and social justice
2 with sovereignty belonging to the people
3 whose security and
welfare shall be the primary purpose of government.
4 The composition
of government in particular should be "in such a manner as to reflect
the federal character of Nigeria and the need to promote national
unity, and also command national loyalty."
5 The constitution also
charges the state with abolishing "all corrupt practices and abuse of
power."
6
On economic objectives of government the constitution states that the
state shall, among other things, "harness the resources of the nation
and promote national prosperity and an efficient, a dynamic and self-
reliant economy; control the national economy in such manner as to
secure the maximum welfare, freedom and happiness of every citizen on
the basis of social justice and opportunity."
7 The economy shall be
run for the common good of Nigerians and not "operated in such a
manner as to permit the concentration of wealth or the means of
production and exchange in the hands of few individuals or of a group
8 while "exploitation of human or natural resources in any form
whatsoever for reasons, other than the good of the community shall be
prevented."
9
These are the major points forming what the constitution calls "the
fundamental objectives and directive principles of state policy."
Performance
There has been conflicting evaluations of the performance of the
Obasanjo administration. His aides, as expected, are particularly
emphatic on his success. One of them even recently justified the
ambition of the President to seek a second term solely on his
successful tenure in office.
10
The overwhelming opinion, however, is that President Obasanjo
has performed far below expectations. In the following illustrations,
there is very little to show that the President has acted according
to the objectives of the constitutions mentioned above.
Beginning with security of lives and properties which
according to the constitution is the primary responsibility of
government, the performance has been exceptionally dismal. At no
time, since the civil war, were so many lives and property lost than
during the tenure of this administration. Ethnic and religious
unrests have caused the death of thousands of Nigerians. The fact
that in some cases they occurred many times in one city, like Lagos,
Kaduna, Kano and Enugu shows the reluctance of the government or its
incompetence to actively stop the menace. Worst still, as we once mentioned the perpetrators are left to go free.
Obasanjo has also failed to keep the delicate balance between
different sections of the society in composition of his cabinet and
other federal appointments. The security sector of the government for
example is dominated by people of his ethnic group; appointments into
command positions in the armed forces and the leadership of the
ruling party which he determined substantially were both in favor of
members of his religion. At a point, even the Federal Character
Commission had cause to voice out its objections
Neither is the polity more stable now than before. There is a
renewal of secessionist agitations either in the form of old Biafra
or the clever calls for restructuring that is championed by
intellectuals of the southwest15 which has given rise to terrorist
organizations like the OPC and MOSSOP.
The prevalence of poverty is something that the
administration inherited from previous regimes. As far back as 1993,
the percentage of Nigerians living under the poverty line has reached
50% and in states like Kano and Bauchi, it was already over 60%.16
The situation has continued to deteriorate in spite of democracy and
the pledges of the President. In a recent interview over the BBC, the
President admitted that poverty has sharply increased during his
tenure but explained that, were it not for his effort, it would have
been worse17.
The fact is that there is little on the ground to show that the
federal government is serious about poverty alleviation. Budgetary
allocations indicate a progressive decline in interest. The
Presidency voted N10billion for poverty alleviation in 2000 budget.
This figure, insufficient as it was, was reduced to N6billion in 2001
and further down to N1billion in 2002. 18 The World Bank has faulted
the poverty alleviation program of the government, which at the
grassroots level is nothing more than distribution of monthly rations
to party loyalists and thugs and attendance of seminars.19
It might be that the government does not like alleviating poverty by
direct intervention. Then indirectly, agriculture would have been the
sector to improve for maximum effect, it employs over 70% of the
population. However, agriculture is among the sectors that suffers
the worst setbacks since the debut of this administration. It stopped
virtually all interventions, including the food supply program under
the defunct Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF)20 and the scrapping of bodies
like National Agricultural Land Development Agency21, an organization
committed to new farmland preparation. In addition, it withdrew
subsidy on fertilizer and consistently allocated ridiculous amounts
to the sector,22 amidst public protests.23
The government also failed to make any impact in areas that are
technically easy. Rehabilitation of roads is a good example. It
revoked contracts of roads rehabilitation awarded in the second phase
the PTF's roads rehabilitation program. After one and half years, it
awarded them to contractors that lack the technical ability to
execute them. In spite of the contracts awarded at rates much higher
than that of the PTF24, after one and half years some of the jobs are
going at snail speed causing the deaths of many Nigerians;25 some
were started and immediately abandoned;26 many have not commenced at
all, a year after their award; and very few have been completed.27
There is even a case of double awards where the federal Ministry of
Works claimed to have awarded the construction of a road that was
earlier completed by a state government at half the price awarded by
the Federal government.28
Let us come down to simple civil service matters, like the payment of
salaries to workers and pensioners. So ineffective are the
disbursements that even the Police went on strike;29 the army too
threatened to embark on one, an action interpreted by government as
mutiny.30 Never in the history of the country was government so
incompetent and insensitive.
The administration is not without its innovations and promises
though. The most pronounced promise was that on electricity. The then
Minister promised six months to register a substantial improvement in
electricity generation and distribution in the country. Nothing was
achieved, and the task had to be assigned to a presidential
committee. In the aftermath of that failure, which saw the sacking of
the management of National Electric Power Authority (NEPA), it was
realized that the N3billion allocated to the organization for the
improvement did not reach NEPA at all. A committee of the senate has
alleged that the money was deposited in a private account for
months.31 Then the President last year promised Nigerians
uninterrupted power supply by the end of 2001. Three months into 2002
the promise has not been fulfilled.32 He has conceded failure and has
set another date, June 2005(!), for generating 10,000 MW.33
The President also launched the Universal Basic Education program
amidst accusations of marginalization by the North. A year lapsed
after the launching without any blueprint at hand; two years later,
today, no teacher or education administrator can convincingly explain
what the program means or what it has achieved so far.
While it was ready to abolish all welfare programs it inherited from
previous administrations without even following the due process of
law34, the Obasanjo administration was very willing to retain
privatization and pursue it with all vigor. The exercise is carried
out with haste,35 without any regard to national interest, regardless
of public protest even by the National Assembly.36 The reasons given
for the privatization are invalid in most cases and the goal of
attracting foreign capital has not been realized in many. Finally,
there are strong allegations that the exercise is perturbed with
corruption,37 which the Director General heading the exercise was
unable to satisfactorily rebut.38
The President has promised to fight against corruption. After a long
delay, a tribunal was promulgated and constituted39. However, no
government official has been brought before it in spite of the
abundance of such cases.40
Finally, the government is poor in its resource allocation. In a
country perverted by the President could buy a jet of over N50 or
N80billion (the exact figures are not known to the public) and build
a stadium of over $300million dollars in a city whose sewage is
flowing freely on roads.
We cannot exhaust the failures of this government. Its performance is
nowhere close to that of the Second Republic or even the Abacha
administration. We only wanted to prove, albeit briefly, that
contrary to its assertions, the administration has failed to fulfill
its promise and abide by the oath of office to pursue public policies
in consonance with the fundamental objectives of the constitution as
quoted earlier. We do not also intend to delve into the performance
of governors and local government chairmen, many of whom have been
publicly castigated by the President as corrupt.
Yet, one other thing needs to be mentioned. It is the commitment of
this regime to democracy. The government has taken an undue advantage
of the widespread poverty in the country and the concentration of
wealth in its hands to play its version of politics that violates
fundamental principles of democracy. This is what we shall discuss in
the section that follows.
Options
The failure of a government to live up to the expectations of
its people is not new in the history of democracy. In such cases, the
constitution has made provisions for the changing it. Such provisions
include the formation of new parties,41 recalling of members of the
legislature42, impeachment of the President43, and elections.44 The
problem with the Obasanjo administration is how it immobilized these
provisions in quest of political dominance and re-election in 2003.
First was the immobilization of opposition parties through
federal appointments and contract awards. This started even before
the presidential elections of 1999 when the leadership of All Peoples
Party (APP) was lured into giving up the idea of fielding any
presidential candidate. There was little wonder when immediately
after assuming office the President appointed its leader as his
adviser on inter-party affairs. He immediately abandoned the party,
never to be heard again. It is likely that the same game will be
played in 2003, where efforts will be made to ensure that the APP
presidential candidate cannot match Obasanjo in personality and
resources. The other party, Alliance for Democracy (AD), given its
ethnic background, will support the second term of Obasanjo. So the
PDP may likely go into alliance with it to ensure that it has
defeated the APP during the next election.
Secondly, the present administration successfully moved to
dominate the ruling party by planting loyalists of the President in
key positions. The nation will hardly forget the corruption that
pervaded the 1999 national convention of the party in Abuja. It was
so brazen that senior party officials like Mal. Adamu Ciroma and Alh.
Bello Kirfi - both members of the Federal Cabinet - had to draw the
attention of the President. He ignored them. Later on, Okadigbo, who
was opposed to Obasanjo, was impeached from the leadership of the
senate. Ghali narrowly escaped after conceding a compromise with the
Presidency.
Thirdly, the party was also glad that opposition groups within it
became impatient about the non-performance of the President. They
were expelled, immediately it became clear that they were
contemplating forming new parties. Then the party held another
convention in which no election took place. Party posts were shared
between nominees loyal to the President and presented only for
ratification by delegates.
Fourthly, new parties have not been registered and the 2001 Electoral
Act was itself tampered with by the President. Stringent conditions
were imposed on the new parties and the sequence of election
reversed. The tenure of local government chairmen was also extended
in violation of the constitutional provisions.45
Fifthly, the PDP is deliberately delaying the promulgation of a new
electoral act after repealing that of 2001. The delay, as rightly
observed by the National Chairman of the APP46, will make matters
worse for any new party, while the ruling PDP has long ago given
Obasanjo a mandate for a second term. The doors have been slammed on
other party members, like Alhaji Abubakar Rimi, to contest the
primaries with him. When finally the new Act is passed by the
Assembly and signed to law by the President later this year, time
will be too late for the new parties to make any impact during the
election.
Sixthly, how are we sure that there will even be elections in 2003?
That is a question that many people would not rush to answer in
affirmative. That is because, given how the Presidency and the PDP
emasculated other parties and gradually built a culture
of 'consensus' candidature, it could use all resources at its
disposal to make other parties give up any contest. Already, last
year, a leading campaigner for Obasanjo and an influential figure in
the Arewa Consultative Forum, Malam Liman Ciroma, has voiced his
approval of zero election in 2003. All elected office holders should
be allowed a second term unconditionally. There are also strong
indications that in some states the three registered parties are
negotiating how the present governors will return unopposed.47
Finally, more apprehensions grew with the sacking of resident
electoral commissioners by the President without even the knowledge
of the Independent Electoral Commission (INEC)48 and their
replacement with members and loyalists of the ruling PDP in all
states of the federation. According to one of the governors,
nominations were done secretly by PDP governors.49 Earlier, the
governors, like the President, also did not show fairness as required
by the constitution50 in the appointments of their state INEC
commissioners. Most of them constituted the body to their advantage
with little or no regard to membership from other parties.
Risk
As a result of the foregoing, the emotions as well as reason
of Nigerians, once again, have returned to their erstwhile position
of frustration with the overwhelming present and anxiety over an
uncertain future. The PDP and the President, like the NPN and UNCP of
the past, have effectively dominated the political landscape of the
country. They are empowered, not by popular support, but by their
access to the resources of the nation which they have shown enough
readiness to employ for achieving their political goals. They also
have the upper hand of incumbency where they dictate, by using the
constitution unfairly, to put any opposition at a disadvantage. Once
more, people have suddenly awakened to the reality that characterizes
the political history of independent Nigeria is characterized: the
impossibility of civilians conducting free and fair elections.51 The
viability of the democracy seems pretty low.
Solution
By way of conclusion, the following are measures required for
continuity of democratic governance in the country.
1. The issue of viability rests largely on the President and the
ruling party. If the two are ready to keep the constitutional trust
reposed in them, contrary to what their steps are now indicating,
then crossing 2003 would be almost certain. To do so, they have to
show fairness and due regard to other parties. They also need to
drastically withdraw the privilege they accorded themselves of using
state resources at their disposal to buy over opponents and direct
the political culture to a monolithic conclusion. They must resist
the temptation of exploiting the economic weakness of their opponents
to deny the country a viable opposition. To do otherwise will lead us
from the present state of dictatorship to that of despotism which, as
Alexis de Tocqueville once warned, "would degrade men rather than
torment them."52
2. There is a need for a viable opposition. Its members
must be intellectually sound enough to enable them furnish the nation
with alternatives of candidates and policies. They must endeavor to
be economically independent of government, or acquire the endurance
to hold on to their views regardless of economic hardships or
overtures.
3. There is a need for a return to ideology. It is a deception
for any serious politician to buy the imperialistic idea that we are
living in a post-ideological era while capitalism is here dominating
the world through globalization and the so-called free market.
Fortunately, the constitution has made democracy and social justice
its cardinal principles of governance, a point I consider sufficient
enough for convergence of all progressive forces.
4. The present political environment is replete with elements
that lack integrity. There is a need, as I argued last week,53 for
people bent on improving the governance of this country to join
politics. Hardly would a society progress without a leadership of
sufficient integrity.
Unless these measures are taken, we should not be surprised to wake
up one day and find that the democracy we so much cherish is gone,
and we have no one to blame but ourselves.