|
Lessons to be learned By Dr. Hadiza Isa Wada Washington, D.C.
It is quite incredible that Nigerians have once again been saved from yet another political dilemma that has all the telltale signs of turning into a political nightmare. The tenure elongation chapter was finally closed with the rejection of the third term bill by the Senate Tuesday. Some voices have been raised against the third term scheme, and action taken. But real credit, in my opinion, goes to the Creator and Cherisher of mankind (God) who saved the nation having heard the prayers of some well intentioned citizens and felt the agony of the vast majority of Nigerians that live in despair. It has been reported that congregations in Nigerian houses of worship have been praying against it for weeks. The open voices against the scheme were otherwise not loud enough, if we may even rate them above a mere whisper.
Nigerians need to demonstrate that they have realized democracy is not an end in itself, but a process that demands continuous vigilance to maintain its tenets. The rights of individual citizens of any democratic nation, including the rights to association, right to free speech and the expression of opinion are some of its cardinal ideals. The right to be governed by people duly chosen by a great mass of the people for that purpose is another major concern. Above it all, is the duty of the people, the press, and various associations to continuously guard those rights daily. Events are to be discussed in a timely fashion, be it those brought forth by nature, the government or some members of the society. Opinion of the governed must be sought quickly and passed on to all facets of the government. The public watches intently what the government decides to do with the opinion of the governed. If those in power tend to turn deaf ears to the way the people feel about events, the electorate does not have to wait for elections to vote those in power out. In most democratic nations, many mechanisms are available for calling to account public office holders who abuse public trust. Nigeria is one of them.
In the United States for example, polls are conducted every single day by professional pollsters, and also by various media outlets over current issues of concern to the public. Results from such polls give the required input to public office holders as to what the people require them to do. Typically, it happens this way: after an event is introduced, interviews are conducted with various stakeholders (those directly involved with the situation). After all sides involved with the issue are understood the press then turn to those who may have professional knowledge about the event to discuss it and pass their own opinion. Having fully presented the issue to the public, the public’s opinion is then sought through the polls (opinion survey). The public hold officials accountable instantly. They do not wait for elections or start looking for long range plans to deal with the situation; hence the resignations, trials and investigations of highly placed individuals within state and federal governments of the United States. People have been forced to resign from high positions, offices have been closed and programs forced to be scraped or reorganized based on people’s demands.
It is very embarrassing for a nation like Nigeria in the 21st Century, when nations like China, Korea and South Africa are making remarkable headway vowing to change their situations, to be still caught in schemes powered by greed and self-serving motives. What must not be allowed in the future is the negligence of any party, allowing it to be personified by any individual, or a few group of individuals. Vigilantly guarding hard earned democratic ideals means strong opposition at all times. The Nigerian public seemed to have dozed off somewhat after the first few years of democratic administration of Olusegun Obansanjo who came to power in 1999. Gradually, the executive arm overshadowed the whole federal government. The two other arms of government designed to act as checks to overzealous executives i.e. the Judiciary and the Legislature soon lost the respect of the general public, as they turned out to be willing tools of the executive. The House actually outperformed the Senate for many years, an irony because the Senate is viewed as more mature based generally on greater experience and age, far above House members. Senate Presidents were replaced at the rate of about twice a year, until the executive finally found one that danced to its tunes. The House was another matter. Though it also faced some initial replacements of Speakers, it was not quite overshadowed until after re-election. The judiciary also towed the line sooner than later. Gradually, President Obasanjo was allowed to personify the ruling party PDP, so much so that criticizing his official actions and decisions irrespective of how bad they appear, is tantamount to anti party activity. A typical example of this type of arm-twisting was how PDP Party Chair Audu Ogbe was ousted. He was a Party chairman who saw the light quite early. In seeking to differentiate the party interest from any personality after re-election, he realized the importance of building the party and redefining its ideology in preparation for 2007. He expressed his position which included calling on the Presidency to pull its acts together for the sake of PDP, the party. The result was the party chairman was ousted and replaced.
Another lesson to be learned from the present Nigerian experiment with democracy is quite clear. There is the need to rid the body polity from greed and power-drunk politicians. Greed and power-drunk politics of Nigeria is so pervasive that State Governors were openly lobbying for inclusion in the third term bid issuing threats to the Presidency for leaving them behind, irrespective of the fact that those who elected both the President and the State Executives have openly expressed resistance. The open way in which those who benefit from fraud and embezzlement within the government of the day were proactively using all means to force tenure extension on the people for their selfish ends is also something that every Nigerian should note and find a way to deal with. Though charges of direct bribery over the issue were tabled, some sounding credible by citing who got the money and from whom, at what time and where, we would keep that aside for now until a viable investigation is conducted. But it is still embarrassing for the nation to even come this far on an issue that no serious nation of the world will waste resources discussing. There is nothing unique about our politics. Many rulers have expressed interest in holding on to power in many nations of the world. But taking subsequent actions, using scarce resources to implement it is what sets Nigeria apart negatively.
Another unfortunate consequence of the third term saga is the amount of precious time wasted. The time and energy wasted thus far could have been well spent building the foundation for stronger and more viable parties in preparation for 2007. Everyone could have benefited. The situation is now threatening to once again make Nigerians form parties based on the wrong motives and values. Everything being equal, parties should be formed based on ideologies, convictions and values. You now have people forming parties based on bitterness with one action or another. Others choose parties or form them based on personalities. Such actions may not augur well for Nigeria. Parties, just like the constitution, should be designed with the goal for growth and strength beyond individual interests. They should also be nurtured to outlive individuals. One of the adverse consequences generally identified by many writers about the present democratic experimentation is connected with the way the parties were hurriedly formed. The result was up until elections in 1999, the party ideologies and strategies were almost identical, so much so that people generally voted based on personalities. Nigerians are being robbed once again of sufficient time to study the parties and where they are heading.
The final lesson and advice is; while it is best to shun those who openly canvassed for third term in the upcoming politics, do not get drunk by the third term hype so much so that you give your blessings to other wolves in sheep clothing, just because they expressed disagreement with third term. Some of the anti third term vanguards did so for selfish reasons. Some, for example, used it as an avenue to surface once again after being bruised in the “who is a better crook” game. Try to study parties and contestants carefully based on various criteria. I have outlined some in my article of February 27, 2006. They include ensuring that contestants have what it takes personality-wise, track record wise (background experience), educational and knowledge wise, and that they have both the moral aptitude plus the strength needed to check unnecessary embezzlement and waste. Finally the electorate should demand that they have already exhibited rikon amana (holding public trust) aspect in some previous positions i.e. the consciousness and moral aptitude to feel that they are humble servants of the bayin Allah (the electorate) that have elected them. And that they have the capacity to hold that trust, knowing that the electorates look up to them to safeguard and protect their lives and property, and also better their lives and that of their children. Do not be hoodwinked.
Hadiza Wada, DBA writes from Washington DC.
|