While the ruling is condemnable, the position of some people that it will throw back the gains of democatic practice is totallty misleading. Such argument tend to justify the present pro-rich political arrangement that has politically and economically estranged the working and poor people of the country. It is vital to state that the present political arrangement cannot be termed democracy and this has been clearly confirmed by the ruling of the Appeal Court.

 

Democracy make people to have control over how they are governed. It involves people’s involvement in how economic, political and social policies are determined. Therefore, democracy must ensure that people control their economic collectively and determine how the nation’s resources will be distributed. But in a system where the resources of the country is in the hands of a tiny minority who control over 80 percent of the nation’s wealth (World Bank, 2005 Report) while 70 percent of the population are living in penury, there cannot be democracy despite trillions of naira that had accrued to the nation since 1999. What we are having presently can be termed “political cartel”; a situation in which the political class comprises those who are controlling the economy and making profit out of this exploitative system. The system is such that all the major political parties are similar in their political compositions (comprising the rich few and moneybags), ideology (commitment to neo-liberal capitalist economic policies) and programmes (sustenance of the pro-rich socio-economic system). The system is such that the political, legal and social arrangement is structured to ensure the continuation of this system. The working and poor masses of the country are being ostrasized from political power; they are prevented from having independent political power through constitutional provision that allow individual moneybags to control more than one political party while the poor people are prevented through obnoxious provision of national spread. The masses are prevented from protesting against obnoxious economic policies while the bosses are allowed to sabotage the economy and force government to bow to their whims and caprices as exemplified by deliberate collapse of the national economic assets (NITEL, NEPA, Ports, Steel mills, etc.) by the political class in order to make them available to the rich few. While the masses are paid penny and prevented from having other means of survival, political class buy up the country and even use their political power to further their economic interest. What is then left for the so-called democracy that allow the rich to explot the poor.

 

In this context, the judiciary is only meant to defend the exploitative system as structured in law. The judiciary is meant to defend capitalism and prevent the masses from taking independent actions by making them to believe that their greivances can be resolved through legalism. But, sometimes mass trust in the judiciary can put the whole system in crisis. For instance, the widespread fraud perpetrated duirng the last elections automatically means that the presidential elections will be cancelled, more so that the judiciary has cancelled some elections. But there is limit to the populism of the judiciary. A cancellation of the presidential election will mean a concession to mass anger by the ruling class. This can further embolden the masses to demand for more from the ruling class and thus endanger the capitalist system, even if President Yar’Adua should re-emerge as the president. It is therefore “sensible” for the “Five Wise Men” to protect the system.

 

The same judiciary was to be used by imperialism in 1993 when the Association for Better Nigeria (ABN) went to court to prevent the confirnmation of Chief MKO Abiola as the winner of the prsidential election. But the mood to end military rule has gone beyond a trust in the judiciary, therefore a bonarpartist approach, exemplified by the Abacha regime has to be adopted to prevent the masses from pushing the system to its limit. Attempt by the Social Democratic Party of Germany to resort to legalism during the rise of fascism in Germany contributed to the emergence of fascism. It can safely be inferred that judiciary is an instrument of the state to maintain the capitalisy system. It can bow to public interest at times in order to build public  confidence in the system, but it will be the most reactionary when mass movement are calling for a positive radical change. Karl Marx was correct in calling law as an instrument to safeguard the private property of the rich few who acquire their wealth through brazen exploitation. To have a blind confidence in the judiciary, as demonstrated by some progressive commentators is a product of shallow understanding of the state. This should not be confused with the treachery and opportunism of some pro-state lawyers who are justifying the ridiculous judgement of the “Five Wisemen”.

 

Furthermore, the mass response to the ruling of the presidential tribunal against expose the unpopularity of the so-called opposition. Going by the mass anger that characterised the electoral fraud which even pushed the labour leadership to call a mass action, one expect that the ruling will push the masses out again. But there is practically no difference among the contestants and their political parties. They stand for the same policies, programmes and ideology – neo-liberalism, thus the free movement of politicians from one political party to another. Therefore, there is no way the mass of working people can risk their lives for those who are committed to the same anti-poor policies. This is different from the mood against the annulment of June 12, 1993 elections. While of course Chief Abiola represent the capitalist class, he also ambigiously represent a mass anger against military rule. But the present capitalist politicians represent the same political arrangement. Even if any one of them emerge in a bye-election, they will represnet the same policies and continue the misery of the poor.

 

Therefore, the only situation that could have pushed the masses out is if there is a political structure of their own, where their collective interest can be protected. This will mean formation of a working class political party that will stand against eo-liberal policies the present pro-rich political class stand for.this will mean a radical working class political party that will stand for public ownership of the commanding height of the economy that will use the huge resources of the society for the interest of the poor as against the present profit-oriented system. It will mean commitment to massive funding of social services such as free and qualitative education, health care, pension, etc, massive provision of efficient, cheap and environmentally-friendly transport system and communication system, provision of adequate and secured jobs for all able bodied citizens coupled with adequate living wages and pension, among others. Such a party will root itself in the masses through involvement in the daily struggle of the masses for better living coupled with adequate grassroot and internal democracy that such party will enjoy. It is only such a party that can elicit mass support and interest. It is only such a party that the masses will be ready to die for. But despite the mass support the labour leadership enjoys, at least going by the popular seven general strikes of the labour since 1999, the labour leadership has not come to realization that the time is ripe for a working class political alternative to the present rot the neo-colonial capitalist system has put the country into. Rather, the labour leadership prefer to partner the Yar’Adua government (the same government whose emergence it condemned), which has openly tell the world that it shall continue the past policies of privatization, commercialization, liberalization, retrenchment, deregulation anf fuel pice hike.

 

The NLC leadership was correct to have said that the fate of the working and poor masses cannot be left in the hands of “Five Wisemen”, but placing its faith in the Electoral Reform panel is worse. Nigeria’s history is replete with several of such committees – from Babangida’s Political Bureau to the Obasanjo’s Political Reform Committee – yet the country is still in the shackles of the corrupt class. The problem is not the law but the socio-economic system that make the law to be used for exploitation of the working majority by the rich few. Only a radical working class political party can save the future of the toiling millions. It is time for the labour and civil societies to draw this conclusion.