A Look at Nigeria's democracy

Like many other Nigerians, I have followed with fervour the colourful debate that trailed the official presentation of the report of the Justice Mohammed Uwais-led Electoral Reforms Panel, set up by the late President Musa Yar’Adua to proffer solutions to the nation’s defective electoral system. This was in fulfilment of a promise he made following his public admission that the election which brought him to power was faulty. The high point of the report was the recommendation that the president be stripped of the singular privilege of appointing the chairman of the Independent national Electoral Commission (INEC). From whatever angle one wants to look at it, the recommendations of the panel was a clear-cut statement that Nigerians were truly hungering for a sound political leadership culture. For a period spanning close to the middle mark of a century, the Nigerian nation has harvested the consequences of poor leadership culture.

It is so sad that Nigeria’s barn has been stalked full with shameful tales of corruption, unemployment, poverty, high crime rate, energy crisis, bad roads, and absolute collapse of the educational and health sectors. As the world’s sixth largest producer of crude oil, Nigeria relies on the importation of petroleum products to service local demands. This has forced government to spend billions of petro-Dollars to subsidise imported fuel. Rather than finding ways to make the nation’s four refineries and petro-chemical plant operate at optimum capacity so as to stop the importation of petroleum products, the leadership of Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Federal Ministry of Finance (FMF), and Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) have in the last two years embarked on a campaign to stampede government into withdrawing fuel subsidy. This minority colony of upper class citizens did that with the knowledge that they can afford to buy petrol even at N500 per litre. Blinded by the privileges they enjoy, they refused to take into cognisance the nation’s poor socio-economical framework that is glaringly too weak to withstand the instruments of international forces, which is built around the US Dollar.

Apart from the open fact that Nigerian workers are not paid the Dollar equivalent of what their contemporaries earn in Europe and the United States, ¾ of the nation’s workforce cannot rely on their salaries for feeding, rent, transport, health, and educational needs of their families. This is one primary root cause of poverty and corruption in the country. In the absence of a sound socio-economic framework, people are forced to look for alternative means to take care of the basic needs of their families. Painfully, corruption is always the available option! Surely, the CBN, FMF, and NGF have put the cart before the horse. President Goodluck Jonathan should as a matter of national importance ignore the elitist drumming and concentrate on strengthening the nation’s socio-economic framework before withdrawing fuel subsidy.

There is no doubt that with the removal of fuel subsidy, government would save so much money, which can be invested in other critical sectors of the economy. Despite this fact, most developed countries still subsidise critical sectors of their national economy. For instance, agricultural subsidies alone accounts for more than 40% of the total budget of the EU. This has not only helped the agro-allied sector to grow; it has equally guaranteed food security in the EU. The message here is that, subsidy is not as bad as is being painted. It is just that the nation’s fiscal policy formulators and team of presidential economic advisers have run dry of ideas. The fuel subsidy mantra is just but a shortcut to the nation’s economic growth. Relying on shortcuts to stabilise an economy most times end up throwing up associated negative challenges especially when the top-bottom approach is applied to critical issues involving fiscal planning. Calls for the removal of fuel subsidy are primarily aimed at covering their failure and also mislead the president into believing that they are doing a good job. Rather than rely on the immediate gains from subsidy removal, the nation’s fiscal policy formulators and economic advisers should task government on the diversification of the economy through the opening up of the non-oil sector. Through this way, the already battered Nigerian masses would not be forced to carry the burden of a few corrupt government officials and inefficient team of economic advisers and fiscal policy formulators.

There are abundant potentials in the agro-allied sector alone. In case Aganga, Sanusi, and Babalola need help, I would offer it free of charge for the sake of our dear nation. Government can raise huge sums of money by rejigging the nation’s anti- corruption protocols. Corruption is costing Nigeria more money than fuel subsidy. They should also encourage government to embark on a thorough review of all contracts and audit the activities of the NNPC. It is very clear that most contracts have been inflated to lubricate the wheels of corruption.

There is no gainsaying that a society can only enjoy the luxury of sound political leadership when the leaders are accountable to the people. For now, the electorates have been robbed of their ballot. It accounts for why political power is still in the hands of the president, governors, and council chairmen. By all measures, it is only through a credible electoral culture that political power can be returned to the electorates. This will help to compel public office holders to deepen the foundations of democracy by rendering purposeful and transparent political leadership.

More than that, let us consider the important fact that blames for all the flawed elections in Nigeria are usually heaped on the head of the chairman of the nation’s electoral body. It was in recognition of this very significant factor that respected opinion leaders, the media, opposition parties, cultural organisation, religious and civil society groups held strongly to the recommendation that the exclusive right to appoint the chairman of INEC be transferred from the president to the National Judicial Council (NJC). The major aim of this recommendation was to build a thick and high wall between the president and the chief electoral umpire. My take on this has been that, even if the NJC is empowered to nominate three persons from which the president was to pick one; the possibility of the president romancing the nation’s chief electoral umpire cannot be ruled out. I had therefore banked on the idea of appointing a tested and strong-willed person to the office of chairman of INEC. I am aware of the question on the lips of several stakeholders: Will a sitting president, desirous of contesting election be kind enough to appoint a strong-willed person to umpire his political battle? For obvious reasons, civil society and opposition parties would not afford to trust a sitting president with such sacred privilege.

Surprisingly however, a wide range of negative voices voluntarily drowned themselves in a pool of harmony immediately after President Goodluck Jonathan nominated the vice chancellor of Bayero University, Kano; Professor Attahiru Jega as chairman of INEC. Many, who had become freelance ambassadors of the Justice Mohammed Uwais-led Electoral Reforms Panel, started praising the courage and sincerity of President Jonathan in nominating a tested no-nonsense academician as the nation’s chief electoral umpire. It was a demonstration that the personality of those to be entrusted with the sacred responsibility of conducting elections remains very critical and even more important than who does the appointment. The few that have expressed regret over the president’s nomination of Professor Jega did so for one underlying reason: There is a strong and genuine fear that just like other fire-spitting crusaders did in the past, Professor Jega too could be flogged into line. This is quite true! However, one yawning question that comes to mind at this point is: What is it that corrupts the spirit of hitherto honest electoral umpires in the past? In my own opinion, lack of integrity and faulty electoral system are the two main cause of electoral fraud in Nigeria. It would take a faulty electoral system and a dishonest president to rig an election. That is to say, the quality of every election is the true reflection of the integrity of the president. That is the reason why the ongoing amendments of the nation’s electoral laws are gladdening. Not minding who appointed him; Professor Jega is a man with the courage to say “No” should the president attempt to muscle him.

For good reasons, I find it difficult to accept the charge that a president, desirous of contest an election cannot be honest with appointing credible electoral umpires. President Goodluck Jonathan has in the last three years demonstrated huge amount of honesty, humility, and dedication to make Nigerians take him by his words concerning credible elections in 2011. There have been several instances where presidents who appointed electoral officers still lost at the polls. This is one important reason for reforming the electoral system. It should also not be taken that the opposition must have to win an election in order to confirm the credibility of the polls.

For now, two fundamental facts have emerged: First among them is that majority of Nigerians have deep confidence in the person of Professor Attahiru Jega. Secondly, by nominating Professor Jega, President Goodluck Jonathan has practically demonstrated that he is serious about the conduct of free and fair elections in 2011. This is true to the extent that the nominee has all the credentials needed for midwifing credible elections in the country. Professor Jega is known to be fearless, intelligent, resolute, and not a pauper. But above all, Jega is not given to materialism. These are some of the factors that would have swallowed him up either by the ruling party or opposition. Many even believe that the opposition does not rig election.

Furthermore, the decision of the Senate to invite members of the general public to make contributions concerning all those nominated to the board of INEC is a good test for the sincerity of President Goodluck Jonathan, who has for the umpteenth time, promised free and fair elections come 2011. Also worthy of note is the fact that the nomination of Professor Jega as INEC chairman is a positive social development. It is surely a practical confirmation that the nation’s reward culture is shifting to the right. For a very long time now, Nigeria has been turned into a country where honest and hardworking people are derided and abandoned to rot away. Nigerians would definitely be encouraged to live clean lives if honesty, integrity, and hardwork are rewarded. This is a very huge challenge to government, religious bodies, socio-cultural organisations, and civil society.

I would however like to warn that the appointment of credible personalities into the board of INEC would not automatically translate into having credible elections. All stakeholders in the Nigerian project must have to join hands and support INEC in order for it to be able to conduct free and fair elections. It is only through credible elections that unpatriotic, dubious, and criminal elements can be kept out of government. Political parties too must have to shun all forms of “do-or-die” politics. Security and law enforcement agencies in the country would need to carry out their duties without fear and favour. Furthermore, as the final hope of the oppressed and cheated during elections, the judiciary must sacrifice everything to dispense justice fairly. There is no doubt that with an impeccable judiciary, money-bags and unrepentant apostles of “do-or-die” politics that are able to dribble past Professor Jega and his team would be quickly tracked down by the long arms of the law.

Let us not quickly forget the fact that some stakeholders were not too eager about making the NJC to nominate the chairman of INEC owing to their perception of the judiciary. They do not see the judiciary as deserving such task going by the number of controversial judgements coming out of the courts. Corruption is known to be Nigeria’s greatest albatross. Many see the judiciary as a major hindrance to fighting the menace of graft in the country. They therefore fear that adding another big feather to its wings may endanger the nation’s democracy. What is critical to Nigeria now is the reformation of the electoral system so as to promote greater transparency during polls. Transparent electoral culture will surely narrow opportunities for rigging of elections. A neutral judiciary will be in a better position to handle election complaints. Whether contemplated or not, people will cry fowl when a judiciary that nominated the chairman of INEC sits on matters calling to question the integrity and activities of the electoral body. Let the judiciary stay detached as prescribed in the doctrine of separation of powers and perform its traditional duties of interpreting the law.