Democracy in Nigeria: So Far How Far
By
Wada Nas
INTRODUCTION.
It was Abraham Lincoln a one time American President who is credited as having described democracy as “government of the people by the people and for the people.” True, democracy is very much this but it is also about respect for the rule of law, the due process, protection of human rights and basic freedoms and the advancement of the general welfare of the people. So democracy is about good governance and better welfare package of the people secured through the due process of the land in which the people are the prime consideration in the formulation of policies.
The struggle for democracy in Nigeria has been a very long one, dating back into our colonial history. Students, workers, market men and women as well as leading political figures including the media were all involved in the process. The contributed a lot to the attainment of our independence on 1st October 1960. Dispute among contending forces with an over ambitious and politicized military hanging around could not allow it last long. The ethnic nature of our society contributed to its fall on 15th January 1966 when the military killed prominent political and military leaders with more victims from the Northern part of the country. Painfully, our democrats of the time welcome this democratically absurd development with hearty congratulations unaware and unappreciative of what was in store for its growth in the years ahead.
This was hardly surprising prior to the sad events of January 1960. Democrats were known to have attempted to overthrow the Balewa Government so early in its life. Late Sam Ikoku, who participated very actively in the attempt, once confirmed when its mastermind, Chief Awolowo, was still around that the attempt was actually true. Thus democrats were the first set of people in Nigeria to go all out for the capture of power through the front door of unconstitutionalism by way of an attempted civilian coup. This callous attitude towards democracy by big time politicians and prominent politicians has been at the roots of the unsuccessful story of the practice of the game since independence right to this day.
General Olusegun Obasanjo, the then Head of State and now the President of the second Republic should be credited for restoring democracy in 1979. To the extent that he faithfully implemented the democratic agenda of General Murtala Mohammed, who was killed in a military coup in 1975, he along with the late general could be described as true patriots of democracy. No matter what we consider of him today, his achievement in the restoration of democracy contributed to the reasons why Nigerians recalled him from retirement to head a new democratic enterprise.
Like deering the first republic when some democrats secretly continued to murder democracy, those who played key roles in this repeated their antics in 1983 deering media power and military connection. Everything possible was done to frustrate the Shagari administration. Governor Bola Ige of Oyo State for example used bull dozers to shatter to the ground the federal housing units meant for the people of the state. He came out with a “secret police” of sort in the name of road Marshals to counter federal force. At each public fora, Shagari was an object of ridicule by southerner governors in all public pronouncements some refused to receive him at airports when he was on official visits to the state. Such opposition was extended to the National Assembly, some of whose members refused to see any wisdom in what the executive was doing.
According to Aluko, because the legislature was dominated by the combination of opposition parties, about 14 bills were left untouched until the military struck in the early hours of 1st January 1984. It was completely ignored that a destroyed federal executive was a destroyed road for democratic survival. Aided by the media and their collaborators, matters were made worse. After the conclusion of the 1983 presidential election, some media came out openly to pad with the military to murder democracy and when this was eventually done, some wrote editorials commending the role of the media in the fall of the Shagari administration. They never saw it as the downfall of democracy. Nemesis was to caught up with than in later years. They had only themselves to blame, for collaborating with the military, when they became the victims of decree No 2 put in place by the Bahari regime.
When General Babangida came to power, he initiated first what may be called quasi democracy, or diarchy as late Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe described it before the end of 1992. State and local government structures were put in place along the line of democracy. He went further to constitute a democratically elected National Assembly. By the time he steeped aside in 1994, he has achieved about 90% of his democratic agenda.
The presidential election caused a very serious problem, which because of our nature, is still lingering on. But in discussing what happened, we cannot ignore the role of the political players and the media. The 1993 presidential primary election were twice conducted and twice rejected by the same class of people who have been rigging in all the elections they won even as rigging in their own domain has caused unprecedented violence in our body politic. At the end of the second primaries they warned that they will free Nigeria. This was not however to be as his supports kept on calling on the military to overthrow Shonekan interim administration. Highly placed persons like Gani Fawahenmi, Prof. Aluiyeina, among several others openly called on General Sani Abacha to take over. When this was done, Abiola, whose “victory was annulled”, provided Abacha with the list of his supporters for appointment as ministers. If he was naïve to think that the military would seize power and hand over to him, there was the point at which he further annulled his victory. Indeed, he mortgaged it by this action the rest as we said is history.
What may be recalled here was the clamors by some Nigerians for General Abacha to contest the election under the platform of all the fire political parties. The late Head of state of course never told anybody of his intentions up to the time of his death in 1998. Most Nigerians do not know that those who advised that General Abacha should not stand as a single candidate of the first parties earned the serious displeasure of their colleagues though not that of Abacha.
The coming of General Abdulsalami Abubakar after the death of Abacha opened yet another chapter in our democratic history, when like Obasanjo he restored democracy to its rightful place and therefore earned rightful place as a hero of our democracy no matter what some of us are saying of him today, he certainly deserves commendation on this score.
The election of General Obasanjo brought a relief to the nation with his democratic role in our national affairs and the considerable traits of non tribal person shown by him. Nigerians hoped that he was the man for the job who would heal the wounds of the nation by carrying every one along. Late Chief MKO Abiola, who later joined the second team of the presidential contest was among a few Nigerians who saw wisdom in the annulment of the primaries and the ban paced on the 23 candidates who participated. Little did he know that the welcome of his own would create a serious problem for the nation and the polity. But a Kaduna based journalist predicted that “had what happened to Yar’Adua, Ciroma and Shinkafi happened to theirs, Nigeria and such others Nigerian would have known no peace.” He made this prediction immediately after the annulment of the presidential primaries right before Abiola thought of joining the race. His correct prediction has since come to pass, Nigeria never knew peace since the June 12 1993 election was annulled. Suddenly every one forgot that there were other election equally annulled and every one kept calm. But not in the case of June 12. People like Yar’Adua whose own victory was annulled were accused of refusing to work for the realisation of June 12. No one had reasoned that if he could not actualize his own annulled victory, then he had no power to have actualized June 12.
Anyway, the coming to power of Shonekan was to pave the way for a fresh presidential election. There were some strong indicatives, though not conferment, that some political move to de annul June 12 and crown its winner.
What has been the situation since May 29, 2001 in terms of democracy score card? In answering this question, we need to reflect on our aspirations towards democracy, in terms of what it is supposed to provide for us, as already listed. Let us take the issue of the practice of democracy itself.
“Obasanjo’s Road To Dictatorship” in the cover of Hallmark Weekly Newspaper of June 30, 1999 with riders, “AD Afenifere acquiesce; Hausa Fulani caged; Church CAN placated; Human Rights cave in; National Assembly cowed; South West press silent”.
Chief Okoye, a Lagos Lawyer, summoned the courage to warn the nation that president Obasanjo was cunningly and craftily moving towards absolute dictatorship with such military dexterity as to make us worry. Another Lagos lawyer, Chief Ozekhome expressed similar view in an interview with the Vanguard of June 25. He has made good his threats of contesting some of the presidential actions in court. According to the New Nigerian of Sunday, June 27, he has already done that. Some National Assembly Chiefs, under so called “Forum 99” have been vocal denouncing alleged unconstitutional actions of the president. A Kaduna based columnist describes him as the “Sole administrator of Nigeria”.
What gave rise to these impressions? his appointments; or better still the mode he acted. Ozekhome, for instance, in the said interview, notes that those whose names were submitted to the senate for ministerial appointment but who were not approved by their political parties were not qualified for consideration because, in his view, the constitution says, among others, that to qualify for ministerial appointment, a citizen must be sponsored by a political party. This was not followed, they were allegedly either hand picked by governors or the president himself without going through the party system.
Although the sacking bonanza he enabled upon early in the life of the administration appeared to many as good for democracy, the body of opinion, nonetheless, is that it offended the constitution by not adhering to its rules. Forum 99, is for instance, of the opinion that the president has no constitutional power to retire military personnel without going through their various councils and in the case of permanent secretaries, the Civil Services Commission and for the Customs, their own Council.
Reporting on this crucial issue, the Nigerian Tribune of June 24, says that, “The Federal Government has abrogated Decree 17 of 1984 which empowered the Head of State to sack, retire or dismiss civil servants arbitrarily without recourse to Civil Service Rules. It goes on, “With this development President Olusegun Obasanjo has no power either under the constitution or any other enactment to retire or dismiss civil servants at will”.
This development apart, sections 29 to 30 of the 1999 Constitution spell out the duties of the Police Service Commission. Section 30 says, “The Commission shall have power to (a) appoint persons to offices (other than the office of IGP) in the Nigeria Police Force and (b) dismiss and exercise disciplinary control over persons holding any office referred to in sub paragraph (a) of this paragraph.
Going by this provision, it may be ruled that there was a sidetrack of the constitution in the sacking of Police Officers immediately President Obasanjo came to power, same could be said in respect of the others sacked on the sole authority of the president.
There is also the issue of Special Advisers. The Constitution requires the President to seek senate approval before he submitted his requirements to the senate. And when he got twelve out of fifteen requested, he, in the opinion of experts, bye-passed the law, apparently or seemingly, and created the office of Senior Special Assistant, which to many is another name for Special Advisers created to twist the constitution.
These perceived legal violations apart, there are other grievances on issue of the constitution of his party. Has he, by these appointments, satisfied the zoning policy of the party, which itself has legal stature? The opinion of legal experts is that any violation of any policy of his party, in his official conduct, so long as such a policy doesn’t conflict with the constitution, which in any case provides for federal character, would to the extent of such a violation be perceived as disregard for the law since the constitution of the party, is recognised as legally binding by the electoral law. The PDP Constitution is therefore part of our Laws whose provisions are binding on its operators. Beside, it is assumed that the acceptance of the provisions by the people was what gave the party its needed electoral votes during the presidential election and so to disregard them is to betray the people.
President Obasanjo set up a standard that all military and police officers who have served in any political capacity are good candidates for tacking, and accordingly, he has sacked about 93 excluding 34 ADCs and as published in the Nigerian Tribune of June 22.
How was it possible that President Obasanjo has been acting more or less as the Sole Administrator of Nigeria at least since May 29 to date? With his high military sense, he is quite aware of areas of sustained resistance and so he went after them to soften the ground and dominated the environment. First, he decisively moved against the North, pierced through its defensive wall and consequently broke its rank. As he expected the far North and the Middle Belt broke rank ready for one another. It was a well calculated strategy to pitch the so called minorities against their Hausa Fulani brothers and on the other hand Northern Muslims vs their Christian kiths. This strategy of divided and rule, has been on the cards for long, Thus, in less than thirty days of his administration the general achieved what some peers have been trying to do since the first republic.
Having equally protected the other zones he opened a front against the PDP leadership. The dominant press, with him doing their biddings, went snoring shielding themselves from seeing or hearing evil. It is not surprising that except for a few, none has seen anything wrong with these violations. They are in the same boat with the NGOs having demonstrated that he was out to meet them half in their several demands.
All in all, through strategic moves, President Obasanjo has successfully conquered all possible opposition forces that matter and this makes it possible for him to institute without any qualms what might be called dictamocracy, a system of democracy dominated by traits of dictatorial practices.
The issue is not whether or not what he is doing is right or wrong. Democracy is not just about doing good without doing it constitutionally. Once democracy loses its constitutional heritage, it also loses the right to its name. As we support President Obasanjo with all our hearts, in improving our lot, we must constantly remind him, in the true tradition of democracy, that we never elected him to lead us from mount militocracy to the cave of dictamocracy, but to the haven of constitutional democracy. This needs be stressed because the worst form of dictatorship is that built on the foundation of democracy.
Such was the opening salvo of the Obasanjo administration. The situation remain the same to this day. Indeed, it has been growing worse if account is taken of how several attempts were made, including alleged bribery of members of House of Representatives to remove Na Abba after the removal of Okadigbo as senate president. Police were drafted to the former senate presidents residence to cow him to submission. All tricks were made to get Na Abba removed became the presidency realized that with the House under his determined leadership, the agenda for a quasi democracy cannot be achieved.
The short of it here is that the goal of democracy under this dispensation was to impose what some one calls agabada dictatorship, such that today, through the transparently untransparent eagle square election of party officials, the ruling PDP has been reduced to a parastatal within the presidency where no consultation is done with it before important policy actions are taken. Along the line, other political parties have been reduced to mere lame structures. The National Assembly has been covered into submission except for the House of Representatives. Worse still agencies of he state are being used against some citizens perceived to be enemies of the administration. The cases of Na Abba and Okadigbo readily come to mind here.
The point here is that the various democratic structures put in place to guide the nation rightly have been reduced to mere rubber stamps of the presidency. Worse is the uncontrollable position of the administration with right to force to association ultimately key officers have been telling Nigerians that the government would not allow the formation of new political parties, which is contrary to the provision of the constitution. Of course Nigerians are aware what would become of the ruling PDP should new political parties be registered.
He know what happened to former Vice President Aikhomu who has been severally harassed because of his membership of a new political association. He was even disallowed from traveling abroad apparently for no good reason. So was also Genera Hassaini and members of the Abacha family. A Babangida self appointed campaigning for IBB was curtailed while those who have been campaigning for Obasanjo/Atiku have been having the field day.
In the area of the respect for the rule of law the senate, in spite of itself, once told the nation that Obasanjo as at September last year committed 21 impeachment offences. In fact, most Nigerians, who have been following events have been making the point that Obasanjo has been administering Nigeria in civilian toga over military fatigue. In fact, this is the general opinion which was why I once said that the problem with our democracy is that general Obasanjo dictates two much to Chief Obasanjo. Blackmailing NASS has been the corner stone of his democratic policies sometimes he starves them of funds using all unconstitutional cans. Militaries and dictatorial traits are so visible in the conduct of public affairs such that we are having a serious guise democracy if not dictatorship with althorn thread of democracy as a subhead.
THE NASS.
The assault on the National Assembly, the symbol of our democracy, has been quite disturbing. Apart from the Na Abba and Okadigbo episodes which we have mentioned, starving it of funds in order to enable members carry out their constitutional obligation has been the major practice. Even allowances of members are paid at the whims of the presidency. Blackmailing than has been the strategic approach to undermine the integrity of the legislature which is seen as an irritant.
Worse still budget provisions were never respected. In all the budget appropriations passed so far, implementation has been deliberately put aside except for what pleases the administration. Extra budgetary expenditure has been the rule through anticipatory approval. Currently the senate is so augured that it has ordered its committees to look into the implementation of the budget. Presently almost 50% of House members have no offices and little do they have the tools to wrote with. Respect for the due process has never been rosy since their administration came to power.
THE
JUDICIARY.
By the recent admission of the Chief Justice of the federation, the judiciary is down. It is not for me to make reference to the cases of General Bamaiyi and others and Faseun a Gani Adams. While the latter two, who were accused of mass murder were granted bail, Bamaiyi and co, some of whom were accused of attempted murder, have been refused bail. We also saw the attempt by the administration to subject Mohammed Abacha to foreign laws administered by a foreign judge and for that matter inside prison not in a court of law. Then we have the glaring discrimination in the fight against corruption where only the Abachas are the most. I don’t need to talk of other discriminatory cases except to draw extension to the fact that five of the zonal commanders of our police in the rank of AIG are all from one ethnic group who also dominate the central command of the force. One wonders what the federal Character Commission is doing here
FREEDOM
OF
SPEECH.
It is true that there is more freedom of speech than before. But it is also true that some of us have been incited because of our views on certain issues. All the same interns of freedom of speech the situation now is better though it falls short of the requirement of democracy. Of democracy dividends, at the federal level, recent Prof. Gana's tour with 70 journalists has not shown the achievements of central Government. The journalists on the tour have only been reporting the achievements in the state and little about the achievements of the federal government. This is why the tour is a waste of public funds.
EXTERNAL
MATTERS.
No Nigerian would dispute the fact that this administration cares more about foreign opinion than the opinion of Nigerians. The greater worry however is that it sight agreement with foreign governments and organisation without consultation with NASS members. There is dangerous for our democracy and sovereignty.
CONCLUSION.
My simple conclusion is that we are still very deep in the woods of dictatorship mixed with minimal doses of democracy with moats of its provisions practiced in the breach.