|
People and Politics By Mohammed Haruna Yar’adua and Politics 2011
Last Thursday, April 16, the Daily Trust published an article by Malam Abba Kyari, former managing director of United Bank for Africa, which ranks among the most profound I’ve read for quite a while. Entitled “Public Enlightenment not mega party”, the article argued that what this country needs to check its descent in to a one-party (PDP) tyranny is the creation of public awareness by the opposition parties of the dangers posed by such tyranny and not the formation of the so much talked about mega party. “The current fad in the polity,” he said, “is the need to create a mega party to challenge and defeat the PDP in the next elections in 2011. This is a dangerous move.” One couldn’t agree more. The move, he said, was dangerous for two reasons. First, it would only strengthen PDP which has since become a past master at planting fifth columnists in opposition parties most of which, as Kyari said, are “shelf parties”. “If”’ he said, “sitting governors elected on the platform of other parties will defect to the PDP, custodians of paper parties are unlikely to hold out.” Second, he said, the move makes three assumptions all of which are fallacious. The move, he said, assumes that PDP is popular, that it actually won the last two general elections in 2003 and 2007 and that it will allow free and fair elections in 2011. At last Monday’s PDP convention in Abuja, President Umaru Yar’adua spoke as if in response to Kyari’s indictment of his party as internally dictatorial and incapable of conducting free and fair elections - an indictment which must’ve resonated well with most Nigerians. “Internal democracy indeed,” the president told the delegates, “is a tradition of the PDP since its formation in 1998 and we lived on this tradition and we will continue as a political party to demonstrate total commitment to internal democracy.” The party did take the commendable first steps in bringing back internal democracy to itself by, first, holding its convention in broad daylight for the first time in a long while – trivial as this may seem - and second, by voting down former president, Olusegun Obasanjo’s monopoly of the chairmanship of its board of trustees by a huge margin – 3,916 to 15. Even then most Nigerians must’ve found the Yar’adua’s talk of a tradition of internal democracy in the PDP very strange indeed. I suspect, like me, most Nigerians must’ve wondered what kind of tradition of internal democracy the president was talking about for a party that, like the PDP did, would chase out virtually all its founding fathers because they disagreed with a sitting president as its No. 1 member over policy and procedure. Most Nigerians must’ve also wondered what tradition of internal democracy the president was talking about when only yesterday one of his party’s many coroneted chairmen – itself evidence of internal tyranny - declared to the world that its brand of “garrison democracy” was it’s unique contribution to political theory. Not only was the president’s talk of a tradition of internal democracy in his party essentially wishful thinking, he also gave Nigerians an assurance of free and fair elections in 2011 that few Nigerians are likely to believe. “Let me assure all Nigerians,” he said, “that this administration is totally committed to electoral reform and we are not going to play politics with it.” Well, in case the president has not heard, most Nigerians believe he is already playing politics with the reform, not least because he rejected the recommendations of the first panel he set up to look in to the report of the Justice Muhammadu Uwais electoral reform committee because the panel told him what he apparently did not want to hear. Key among the Uwais committe’s recommendations which Yar’adua rejected was the suggestion that as president he should half relinquish his constitutional prerogative for nominating members and chairmen of the electoral commission by allowing the judiciary to play a role in the nominations. Another key recommendation he rejected was a time limit for hearing of election petitions. His minister of justice and attorney-general, Mr. Michael Aondoakaa, says these recommendations undermine the Constitution’s central principles of rule of law and of separation of powers among the three arms of government. Possibly so. But then aren’t there overlaps in the responsibilities and powers of these arms which allow for exceptions to the rules? In any case if, for example, the practice and principle of accelerated hearing is acceptable in law what can be more deserving of it than election petitions whose amicable resolutions are fundamental to the evolution of genuine democracy in our much-abused country? Whatever the president says, most Nigerians, I suspect, believe he is already playing politics with the electoral reform and not just because of his rejection of the critical recommendations of the Uwais committee. Even more damning is the fact that until last Monday he maintained a loud silence over the gratuitous campaign by several PDP chieftains for his second term two years hence. I say gratuitous because almost two years since becoming president he is yet to deliver on even one item in his much hyped Seven-Point Agenda. Even now that he has told his party to stop the campaigns and concentrate on delivering on its promises, I doubt if it will end the widespread skepticism about his sincerity and commitment to free and fair elections. The way I see it only one thing can banish all such skepticicisms; an indication, or better still, an announcement, that he is not interested in second term. This, of course, is a tall order. But unless he is seen to be personally disinterested in the outcome of the next general elections, nothing he does or says will convince most skeptics that he is capable of reforming the country’s electoral system. Given the fragility of our democracy, President Obasanjo had the historical opportunity in the run-up to the 2003 elections to build upon his image as the military head of state who voluntarily relinquished power back in 1979, by doing a Mandela this time, i.e. by serving for only one term and that way possibly break the jinx of the country’s apparent inability of politicians to conduct universally acceptable elections since Independence. He blew the opportunity. Instead he even foolishly proceeded to scheme to rape the Constitutional two-term limit. As a result he ended what would’ve been an illustrious career in public service in total disgrace. Of course even if Yar’adua accepts to do a Mandela there are no guarantees that PDP will allow free and fair elections in 2011. That, as Abba Kyari implied, would depend on vigilance on the part of the opposition parties rather than on their formation of a so-called mega party. It would also require what the Emir of Katsina, Alhaji Abdulmumini Kabir Usman recently called for, namely, the self- re-branding of the hearts of our leaders, something which no amount of constitutional or legal reforms can bring about. However, what is certain is that without Yar’adua doing a Mandela the elections in 2011 are guaranteed to be un-free and unfair.
Corrections
My friend and publisher of Media Review, Mr. Lanre Idowu, drew my attention last week to the error in the week’s piece wherein I said President Obasanjo’s controversial meeting with his vice, Atiku Abubakar took place on his Ota Farm. As Lanre said it took place in the president’s hilltop home in Abeokuta, not in Ota. Several readers also drew my attention to my mis-spelling of the surname of the host of BBC’s Hardtalk. I spelt it as Sucker instead of Sackur I regret both errors. |