Adamu Adamu and Democracy by Force

Adamu Adamu and Democracy by Force

Abdullah Musa

A friend once told me a real life story in which he was a witness. He was in the house of Northern elite, and there many people going in and out, each seeking one kind of favor or the other. The friend in question was a bit close to the owner of the house. He sighted a particular Ustaz, (a Muslim scholar) whom he had seen there on and off for quite some time. The Ustaz had a mission with the owner of the house and on that day he came to the realization that his mission was not going to see the light of the world. He regretted bitterly and openly; may be his need of the favors of the rich, and which the rich cruelly denied. Being someone knowledgeable about what is going to happen to the world, he blurted out: duniyar ma tashi za tai kowa ya huta! He meant that the world was going to come to an end and everybody would be relieved: the have-nots and the haves! My friend understood his frustrations and drew him aside, gave him some amount to support himself back home, and promised to intercede with the rich man on his behalf, purchasing some extra days for the world to continue rolling on or so it seems.

The second part of Adamu Adamu’s article on sharing the cake of corruption carried similar sign of frustration with the way things are in respect of governance and Nigeria’s democracy. In deep-seated frustration he said that it is better for some within the military who may not be prompted by an outside power to seize power in order to instill in us the democratic norms. He said the hope was that Chief Obasanjo was going to do that in 1999 but he failed. Adamu Adamu does not agree that the worst form of democracy is better than the best of the military.

Individuals do differ as to the reason why they hold the values they do. Some may be reasoned out of their stances if they had arrived at their positions due to insufficient knowledge. Others are by nature inclined to the use of force to get their agenda across, and as such at any point they encounter resistance to their ides they may resort to the use of force.

George Walker Bush wanted to use force to topple regimes in Middle East in order to install those who would shape Middle East into the form and direction that best pleases him. He believes that leadership is the key to change, and once you change the leadership by the use of the force of war, then society is irreversibly changed for the better or worse; but definitely it will not go back to its former state.

The State of Israel was created by the force and deceit of Western Europe and America. Sixty years on, force is still being used to keep it in place and to keep the original inhabitants of Palestine displaced. We can see then that force works. However to opt for the use of the military in order to install democracy is to my understanding is like praying for a hurricane in order to practice agriculture. The whole essence of democracy is about people. And the central idea is about choice. The idea being that for people to be governed they ought to have a choice in who does the governing, else you have tyranny.

In Nigeria, many believe that free and fair elections elude us. But I don’t believe so without qualifying it. Was there free and fair gubernatorial election in Kano? Was there same in Bauchi? Was there also free and fair gubernatorial election in Lagos? Had the courts not restored the mandates to their rightful owners in Edo, in Ondo and so on? So do you help Fashola or a Shekarau by calling for the military to topple him in order to have free and fair election? Which free election would you then be talking about?

Nigeria is supposed to be a federation, but in practice it is not. The central government exercises tremendous powers, such that those who want real power feel that it is the place to ‘gun’ for. In any human enterprise we have to concede then we do not run into perfection over night. In so far as we are getting elections right at state level, or getting them righted by the courts, then one day we will get them right at the federal level.

Democracy is highly aided in its enthronement by the quality of the citizenry; that is, their perceptions of whom they are; what they stand for. We are usually in a hurry to develop, to contribute our best, because we know that we do not have unlimited time spend in this world. Even though that is true, we have no choice but to persist in building the people so that generations after us may be able to perfect the system better. But once our psyche keeps looking at the military as a short cut to democracy, then my view is that it is not democracy we want but the facilitation of the way for an individual we want to come to power. If that individual expires so also goes our democracy?

Our understanding of governments and their structure limits our ability to fight corruption. Many citizens do not actively contribute to the coffers of the government. Because they don’t, they do not lay claim to the resources of the government. The Niger Deltans are in their agitations because they can see the source of the wealth. Many of us cannot. Because we cannot, depend on hand outs. The farmers, the traders, the artisans are hardest hit by corruption but they are dis-organized. They do not have any coherent strategy with which they approach those in power. The bowls of fertilizer dished out, or even the bag that an official of agric department in Abuja mercilessly loads unto the head of a peasant woman, (as if the wheel barrow has not been invented) are also symptoms of the disease of an imperial attitude from the governors to the governed. In a democracy, someone should not have the luxury of remaining un-educated. Because people choose to remain in the dark, they are raped without even knowing who the rapists are.

A segment of Northern elite are always inclined to call for military intervention where the playing field seems not to favor them. Do we not have the patience for democracy to grow so that we all reap? Or is it that we are deeply attached to our emirate system of being on the saddle for life that we find it distasteful to let the masses choose?